The propaganda machine is (slowly) making progress in (rightly) painting Democrats as the ones refusing to negotiate right now. Democrats make it easier by publicly stating they won’t negotiate. As we see in recent CNN poll, the difference between those that think Republicans are to blame and those who think Democrats are to blame is fairly small and getting smaller.
The polls have been going in the other way- more and more folks see that Republicans are to blame, not Obama and the Democrats.
Yes–that is a demand about tactic, not policy. That’s not something that’s going to be negotiated over. That tactic is one that can be used by either side, and the side that cares least about the country’s well-being is the side that wins with that tactic.
We can imagine many other tactics that could be used to solve disagreements: arm-wrestling, dueling with pistols, coin-flips, the Thunderdome. If someone suggests that disputes be solved in the Thunderdome, the other side is perfectly justified in flat-out refusing that tactic, refusing even to consider a compromise like using padded weaponry, or allowing five people to enter and three to leave, or whatever.
Similarly, this game of chicken that Republicans are proposing as a tactic for determining federal policy is one that can be rejected out of hand. It’s not a negotiation over policy, it’s a tactic for determining that policy. And it’s a terrible one.
I seriously wonder whether you’ve negotiated anything in your life.
Factually wrong.
Ever heard of “Judgement of Solomon”? It’s exactly the other way around.
Disapproval of Republicans is up. So is disapproval of Democrats. How does that “agree with iiandyiiii”?
Note the careful title wording for the article you’re citing. “Republicans Lose Ground vs. Obama in the Shutdown Blame Game”. Not “Republicans Lose Ground vs. Democrats in the Shutdown Blame Game”. Did you wonder why that was?
No, I didn’t wonder. Because I can read. First of all, you can’t possibly be trying to argue that Obama is not the current face of the Democratic party. I can’t believe anyone would honestly hold that position.
But even if you’re trying to separate Congressional Democrats from iianydyiii’s “Obama and the Democrats”, you’d still be wrong. Here’s the pdf with full results of the poll. The data’s in the article too, but maybe you missed it. There was a 7% gap between the blame being placed on the GOP vs the Dems in the House. Now it’s 9% and growing. So the reality is the opposite of what you said.
The difference between those who think the GOP is to blame and those who think the Dems are to blame is growing.
Because those are the two major parties in this crisis. But it doesn’t matter- the Republicans have lost ground against both Obama and the Democrats. Obama’s “blame deficit” has shrunk from 9 to 6 points… the Democrats “blame deficit” has expanded slightly, from 22 to 26 points, and the Republicans “blame deficit” has increased the most- from 37 to 46 points. So not only do more people blame the Republicans than Obama or the Democrats, but the gap is growing over time.
I was completely right and you were totally wrong.
According to CNN/ORC International polls, it is shrinking. A week ago, 69% blamed Republicans, while 58% blamed Democrats. A week later, the numbers shifted to 63% vs 57%.
Of course I have. In that story, the person who sets up the “kill the [beloved entity] in order to win” is the disinterested judge, not one of the combatants, so the analogy falls apart–which is why I didn’t use it when I first thought of it. HOWEVER, in that story, the party that is most willing to play along with that scenario is the loser, the fake, the impostor, the person whom our judgment goes against.
Which is, by analogy, the Republican Party, who have tried to use this tactic in this case.
How on earth you think that supports your case is beyond me.
If someone says “give me $5 or the puppy gets it” and you say “I refuse to negotiate, kill the puppy”, then you don’t care much about the puppy, do you?
How would you counter them?
-
If spending - revenue > deficit allowed by the debt ceiling, then how can you possibly read into it a way that the 3 laws don’t conflict and don’t involve a permanent shutdown? Tacit in this is that the Federal government has an obligation to perform the duties proscribed in the Constitution and thus a true 100% shutdown is unconstitutional and that preventing that by running essential services on credit is in effect nullifying the debt ceiling.
-
Everyone seems to think that this is the strongest legal argument but I’m not sure why running out of money violates the 14th Amendment. I think it has something to do with money already committed in the budget is a debt and must be paid by issuing debt (and already we have a problem with equivocation) and they can’t issue IOU’s unless of course they issue IOU’s.
-
If the President is obligated to pay the budget but can’t borrow the money (Article I, Section 8) then Congress is in effect interfering in the role of the President. In other words, if Congress makes the obligation and the laws to enforce the obligation, although you could argue that using the Impoundment Law of 1974 and Train v. City of New York may be a stretch, they are obligating the President into breaking the law by not spending the money already appropriated.
Please read your own cites and try to match the numbers you quote with the questions asked. From the 9/30 article
From the 10/7 article:
Your cite is worse for your position than the one I provided. :smack:
By the way, here’s where you got the 69% number in the 9/30 article:
When you compare your position to killing puppies as a positive, maybe it’s time to rethink your outlook?
Nope. It’s not the absolute #s that are important. It is the relative ones - R vs D.
And?
I am putting it in Democrat terms - since that is how they have been framing it.
And they were two separate questions. You can’t just pull answers from one question to fit another. The questions are at the bottom of the 9/30 article. There were four of them. You’re pulling the answer from question #3 and pretending it was the answer to question #1. That’s not how answers work. That’s not how anything works.
That’s the only question comparing Republicans to Democrats. And yes, I presumed that thinking that Congressmen are acting like spoiled children is blaming them.
So what you’re saying is that if terrorists take hostages and demand that we release the Gitmo prisoners or they’ll kill the hostages, that we should do what they say or we must not care about the prisoners? Are you listening to yourself?