-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Chuck Schumer: We'll put $1.6 billion toward border security
- Thread starter Deleted member 15440
- Start date
I have an issue with an actual barrier based on the money and maintenance costs. I have an issue with the rhetoric surrounding the caravan and immigrants in general from the Republican Party in general and Trump specifically. Stop misstating my opinions because you can't be assed to look into something before posting something extremely misleading. Glad the moderators added context to your first post.
I'm not necessarily against putting some fences up and tightening security if it comes with more humane and enforceable immigration policy, but that's a negotiation that needs to made.
But if you said "We're willing to let qualified undocumented immigrants with clean records get a path to legal residency and eventual citizenship, and expand the guest worker program to allow for long term residency," in exchange for the wall, I'd take it. The wall is a dumb idea and a waste of money, but the rights of immigrants are the most important thing.
I don't like Schumer, but doesn't this clearly state that this is a tactic specifically to avoid the operation of the govt being held hostage by wall and border security demands?
OP
OP
User Banned (2 Weeks): Hostility, long history of similar infractions
we can always count on the mod team to give fascists the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their euphemisms, for sure
I mean you're asking for a government shutdown then.
I don't really understand the point of this post but no 'border security' and the 'wall' are not synonymous. There is a distinction to be made.
Republicans literally already did that a year ago, and it ended badly for them. Most of all though, it hurt DREAMers. I say if Trump wants to be responsible for another government shutdown, they can bring it. The public will blame the president. We need to get DACA worked out by any means.
Ehh. $1.6 billion ain't great, but it ain't awful, and will keep the government from shutting down (or if it does it'll be in the hands of the GOP and Trump).
I hope they can get DACA through a s a compromise. That's where I'll judge Schumer, not cause of some negotiated half way budget.
I hope they can get DACA through a s a compromise. That's where I'll judge Schumer, not cause of some negotiated half way budget.
On the other hand, we should allow the operation of the government to be held hostage rather than fund teargas and child jails
He's so much worse than Pelosi.
It doesn't matter because the deal should be no more money for any of it, period.
It doesn't matter because the deal should be no more money for any of it, period.
This is completely untrue. Trump has never played semantics with wall vs. border security and has always been explicitly clear about wanting a real physical towering wall along the southern border. What the fuck do you think he's doing on those wall prototype vists, looking at cameras and drones?
You're wrong, your OP was deliberately misleading, and rather admit your mistake you're doubling down on this bullshit about how "the wall" and "border security" have always meant the same thing all along (when it hasn't) and that those who suggest otherwise are in fact the real racists.
People blamed Trump cause he fucked the deal (which he probably will now). If democrats shut down the government by flatly saying no, you can bet your ass they'll be blamed.
I don't know many people that would disagree with that. But far too few, including myself, do very little action-wise to change it.
Polling was bad for Dems first time the shutdown was attempted and it led to it being aborted near immediately.
I agree with this and it drives me crazy that we've allowed Trump to get away from his "and Mexico will pay for it" pledge. Like, nobody even remembers that that was ever part of it!
Context -> NYT: Battle Over Wall Risks Shutdown as Lawmakers Scramble to Fund Government
Aides familiar with the negotiation process said lawmakers might group the seven spending bills into one package, effectively tying the wall provision to other government efforts more popular with Democrats. Democrats insist that while they are willing to fund some measures to increase border security, billions of dollars for a concrete border wall is a nonstarter.
"The Democrats and Republicans came to the $1.6 billion agreement," Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the newly re-elected Democratic minority leader, told reporters on Wednesday. "It is tough security. It is sensors. It is drones. It is roads. It is help at the border in a far more effective way than the wall."
"We believe Democrats and Republicans should stick with their agreement and not let President Trump interfere," he added. "Every time he interferes, it gets bollixed up."
The House has allocated $5 billion for border security and wall funding. The Senate has not gone along. With new lawmakers descending on Washington and wrangling intensifying ahead of Democratic leadership elections, multiple aides said it was unlikely a compromise could emerge before the Thanksgiving break.
The Senate spending bill needs 60 votes."The Democrats and Republicans came to the $1.6 billion agreement," Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the newly re-elected Democratic minority leader, told reporters on Wednesday. "It is tough security. It is sensors. It is drones. It is roads. It is help at the border in a far more effective way than the wall."
"We believe Democrats and Republicans should stick with their agreement and not let President Trump interfere," he added. "Every time he interferes, it gets bollixed up."
The House has allocated $5 billion for border security and wall funding. The Senate has not gone along. With new lawmakers descending on Washington and wrangling intensifying ahead of Democratic leadership elections, multiple aides said it was unlikely a compromise could emerge before the Thanksgiving break.
OP
OP
i'm not saying you're racist for suggesting "border security" and "the wall" aren't synonymous, i'm suggesting that you're carrying rhetorical water for racists
there's a distinction
Why are democrats always worried about being blamed for shit. The next election is two years away. Have you seen the amount of shit Trump has done and will do in two years?
Yeah, this is true, but I'm still hopeful it'll happen. If it gets past the House by some miracle and Chuck ends up fumbling it, then I'll be pissed.
Hot take, border security is actually worse than the wall
The wall isn't kidnapping and tear gassing children, whereas that's what the money earmarked for border security will explicitly be spent on
And this is what people fail to understand. "JUST LET THE GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN!" you know what, no. No we should probably avoid that since most of the country relies on the government in some fashion. I hate the "both sides" shit, but that's literally what it will take to get anywhere. Period.
How about you offer zero and maybe 1.6 billion if they include language to protect Mueller? Like at least get us something in return don't start negotiating at 1.6 billion
The Democrats may have "won the house by the largest margin of victory ever" but you sure couldn't tell with how quick some posters want to say fuck the Democrats.
Not sure why people are getting off on the distinction between "border security funding" and "border wall funding", other than they saw a user name that they don't like and got a sudden urge to tear gas some refugees.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...ose-spending-more-than-16b-on-border-security
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...ose-spending-more-than-16b-on-border-security
yup, that's the real problem here, not our brutal and inhumane immigration policy
Because Dem messaging on it was totally fucked.
Who's in charge of Dem messaging in the Senate again? Thinking emoji
This should be in the OP. This is what people should want Schumer's position to be.
If you are expecting cohesive Dem messaging, are you mistaking them for Republicans? :-P
And as I recall, the polling was all bonked up anyway. They'd ask "If DACA worth shutting down the government over?" Of course the majority is going to say no. Who wants the government shutdown? But when people were asked if Repubicans and Trump should negotiate on DACA or who would be blamed for a shutdown, people said "yes" and "the president".
You can pretty much expect that to not change anytime soon. Like it or not, people in this country are xenophobic and they don't want "others" coming here. That's the majority. Sure we can get a dem in there who thinks differently. Guess what happens when they try to push through their "different" agenda... They get voted out.
Face it people, this country is fucked up. It's repairable but it's going to take several generations.
If we agree that Dem leadership is bad, shouldn't you agree that we should get better Dem leadership?
Step one on repairing it would probably not be going "welp I guess we're all racists now" but actually taking a moral stand against our inhumane immigration policy.
Is that what's being discussed in the OP? I was sure the OP prior to the mod edit was about the Democrats funding Trump's border wall based off of one tweet with no other sources.