• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Schumer, Pelosi announce deal with Trump to protect young immigrants; No wall

Surfinn

Member
Nov 12, 2015
11,362
1
300
I'm not using the word "just" in the temporal sense.

"I'm going to quietly agree with dems so I can make something happen and look good" isn't about media ratings.

There is no secret behind it. He gets plenty of coverage just being who he is, a racist asshole.

And again, he's not a racist asshole because he wants media coverage. He's a racist asshole who happens to be bolstered and emboldened by a media who just can't help but go all in to boost their ratings with his frequently unbelievably horrible antics, behaviors and decisions.

There is no plan

He just flip flops whenever it seems like it might make him feel better

That's the way it appears to me.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,747
19,832
1,910
Best Coast
That's the way it appears to me.
Base your analysis on the results, not the appearances.


Not exactly.

I believe this is all bullshit maneuvering by Trump.

He pulled DACA and forced the Dems to make a deal with him or 800K Dreamers will be deported in 6 months. That's extortion right off the bat.

So, they'll make a deal to keep them here - in exchange for hefty border security funding.

I believe the GoP and Trump will find a way to move whatever money it is into the Wall. They'll consider it part of the "border security budget package" and if need be, will out-vote the Dems in congress to shift the money to it after it's confirmed.

I don't know for sure the logistics of that, but I am convinced it will happen so long as the Republicans have a majority. I'm not even sure if they 60 votes or just a simple majority to reroute the budget money like that. May only take something as simple as redefining or re-labeling a couple items in the bill.

Bottom line - I do not trust anything Trump says or does.

He wants that Wall, even if it means keeping the 800K Dreamers here. He is trying right now to extort money for that wall by using those 800K Dreamers as bait.

Best observation in the thread so far.
 

Ithil

Member
Apr 19, 2011
41,089
1
0
He did not tell Mexico there will be no wall. He told Mexico to stop saying they won't pay for it. He actually told Mexico that the wall is the most important politically for him.

He said the wall was the least important thing really, but the most important politically. His problem was Mexico publicly saying they wouldn't pay for it, I doubt he ever expected them to actually pay for it.
He doesn't care about actually making the wall happen, he only cares about keeping his base believing it will happen.

Everything is about image with this guy.
 

Surfinn

Member
Nov 12, 2015
11,362
1
300
Base your analysis on the results, not the appearances.

What

There have been reports for MONTHS that Trump is miserable. And there was a recent one where he apparently started to realize that people hate him and that he is making deals to be more liked
 

BronsonLee

Member
Oct 30, 2011
50,961
2
0
None of this tells me Trump is any good at maneuvering/deal making at all

Republicans didn't want him to touch DACA (he did)
They really didn't want him to mess with the debt ceiling stuff until after midterms (he did)
Republicans also don't want the wall
 

Ithil

Member
Apr 19, 2011
41,089
1
0
When will people stop ascribing some master manipulator bullshit to Trump?
He is not complex at all, his thought process is simplistic and easy to track. There is no master plan here, he doesn't do master plans.
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
Base your analysis on the results, not the appearances.




Best observation in the thread so far.

Poor observation given the actual legislative mechanics and the fact that there is not majority GOP support for the wall--otherwise it could just be included in a reconciliation bill.
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,147
2
400
Not exactly.

I believe this is all bullshit maneuvering by Trump.

He pulled DACA and forced the Dems to make a deal with him or 800K Dreamers will be deported in 6 months. That's extortion right off the bat.

So, they'll make a deal to keep them here - in exchange for hefty border security funding.

I believe the GoP and Trump will find a way to move whatever money it is into the Wall. They'll consider it part of the "border security budget package" and if need be, will out-vote the Dems in congress to shift the money to it after it's confirmed.

I don't know for sure the logistics of that, but I am convinced it will happen so long as the Republicans have a majority. I'm not even sure if they 60 votes or just a simple majority to reroute the budget money like that. May only take something as simple as redefining or re-labeling a couple items in the bill.

Bottom line - I do not trust anything Trump says or does.

He wants that Wall, even if it means keeping the 800K Dreamers here. He is trying right now to extort money for that wall by using those 800K Dreamers as bait.

He didn't force the Dems to do anything...seeing as they don't have a say and only do because he went to them. Not to mention if there wasn't a deal made the only way it falls on the Dems lap is by people who'd blame them for the Sun shining.

Not to mention the rest of this master plan hinges on the GOP pulling off something ike this when they couldn't even strip healthcare away from millions when they all wanted it....but details. Plus they'll have to make a budget all GOP members agree...which is no slam dunk.

I'm all for master plans, but Trump nor the GOP have shown the capability of pulling this off while passing the legislation necessary. I may be missing some things, but I haven't heard GOP members jumping up and down with glee when it comes to funding this thing.

Base your analysis on the results, not the appearances.




Best observation in the thread so far.

It's an observation that ignores reality....wouldn't call that best at anything.
 

Fercho

Member
Jan 27, 2017
529
0
285
Orange cheeto should be really relieved right now, because he is now able to drop that Wall nonsense.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,747
19,832
1,910
Best Coast
Poor observation given the actual legislative mechanics and the fact that there is not majority GOP support for the wall--otherwise it could just be included in a reconciliation bill.

Doesn't matter when "The Wall" is still such a nebulous and fungible concept, and easily folded into the generalities of "border security".
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
Doesn't matter when "The Wall" is still such a nebulous and fungible concept, and easily folded into the generalities of "border security".

It does matter. They put border security in the continuing resolution in April but the Democrats stripped out any funding for a wall or fence, which was in the original version. This is why they still can still credibly claim there is no wall funding even though there was increased border security funding. Most voters understand that there has been no wall funding.
 

Surfinn

Member
Nov 12, 2015
11,362
1
300
I'm all for master plans, but Trump nor the GOP have shown the capability of pulling this off while passing the legislation necessary. I may be missing some things, but I haven't heard GOP members jumping up and down with glee when it comes to funding this thing.

Why, after all this time, people still assume "things are going according to plan", is absolutely beyond me
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,747
19,832
1,910
Best Coast
It does matter. They put border security in the continuing resolution in April but the Democrats stripped out any funding for a wall or fence, which was in the original version. This is why they still can still credibly claim there is no wall funding even though there was increased border security funding. Most voters understand that there has been no wall funding.

That's the point. What difference does it make if the goal of keeping immigrants out is strengthened anyway? It's a "not a wall" wall.
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,147
2
400
Why, after all this time, people still assume "things are going according to plan", is absolutely beyond me

Aren't they supposed to be doing the most extensive rewrite of the tax code in quite some time also? If they can pull all this off then...damn.
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
That's the point. What difference does it make if the goal of keeping immigrants out is strengthened anyway? It's a "not a wall" wall.

There is bipartisan support for increased border security. The immigration reform proposals that have failed have been coupled with border security. Durbin, who wrote the Dream Act has called for increased border security. The Gang of Eight bill that was a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws and increase immigration was called the "Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act".
 

Marvel

could never
Jul 5, 2013
30,828
1,311
815
Here's footage of his pivot on the wall.

Lmfao
 

Ponn

Banned
Mar 10, 2005
22,854
1
0
Florida
Orange cheeto should be really relieved right now, because he is now able to drop that Wall nonsense.

He won't. He's obsessive, egotistical and a narcissist. He may put it on a back burner but it will come rearing up again because he can't let shit go.
 

Ishan

Junior Member
Jun 13, 2013
5,050
0
425
Then there is bipartisan support for a "not a wall" wall, even if they publicly hate "The Wall".

Youre conflating two issues

There has always been support for stopping illegal immigration across the board.
The wall is seen as ineffective and a waste of money which is the reason why ppl dont want it.
Refugees entry is a different issue thru proper channels
Dreamers is a different issue due to them being here as children due to their parents.

If your point is lax border security youre going to find opposition across the political spectrum.
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
Then there is bipartisan support for a "not a wall" wall, even if they publicly hate "The Wall".

Border security, especially when tied to liberalization of immigration rules, is not a wall. A wall is just a symbolic waste of money. You are actually claiming that the Gang of Eight bill is no different than a wall?
 

le.phat

Member
Dec 26, 2006
4,868
2
0
Not exactly.

I believe this is all bullshit maneuvering by Trump.

He pulled DACA and forced the Dems to make a deal with him or 800K Dreamers will be deported in 6 months. That's extortion right off the bat.

So, they'll make a deal to keep them here - in exchange for hefty border security funding.

I believe the GoP and Trump will find a way to move whatever money it is into the Wall. They'll consider it part of the "border security budget package" and if need be, will out-vote the Dems in congress to shift the money to it after it's confirmed.

I don't know for sure the logistics of that, but I am convinced it will happen so long as the Republicans have a majority. I'm not even sure if they 60 votes or just a simple majority to reroute the budget money like that. May only take something as simple as redefining or re-labeling a couple items in the bill.

Bottom line - I do not trust anything Trump says or does.

He wants that Wall, even if it means keeping the 800K Dreamers here. He is trying right now to extort money for that wall by using those 800K Dreamers as bait.

Thats fine if that means that his deranged base start to see him as 'establishment'. R-Leadership are still fuming, Breitbart is shitflinging, his base morally unraveling.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,747
19,832
1,910
Best Coast
Youre conflating two issues

There has always been support for stopping illegal immigration across the board.
The wall is seen as ineffective and a waste of money which is the reason why ppl dont want it.
Refugees entry is a different issue thru proper channels
Dreamers is a different issue due to them being here as children due to their parents.

If your point is lax border security youre going to find opposition across the political spectrum.

Border security, especially when tied to liberalization of immigration rules, is not a wall. A wall is just a symbolic waste of money. You are actually claiming that the Gang of Eight bill is no different than a wall?
It's this:
That's the point. What difference does it make if the goal of keeping immigrants out is strengthened anyway? It's a "not a wall" wall.

It doesn't matter if "The Wall" is constructed in its entirety or if it's just a conceptual threat. If Trump uses that threat to dampen illegal immigration under the guise of "border security", it's functionally the same thing.

Provide evidence that there is public support for a physical barrier vs generic border security increases?
I'm going off of what the others said, and my statement isn't specifically regarding the comparison of those two things explicitly.

There is bipartisan support for increased border security.
There has always been support for stopping illegal immigration across the board.
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
It's this:


It doesn't matter if "The Wall" is constructed in its entirety or if it's just a conceptual threat. If Trump uses that threat to dampen illegal immigration under the guise of "border security", it's functionally the same thing.


I'm going off of what the others said, and my statement isn't specifically regarding the comparison of those two things explicitly.

It is not functionally the same thing.

People are not opposed to the wall because they support open borders, its because it is a waste of money that won't accomplish anything, and because Trump said it will be free.
 

Ishan

Junior Member
Jun 13, 2013
5,050
0
425
It's this:


It doesn't matter if "The Wall" is constructed in its entirety or if it's just a conceptual threat. If Trump uses that threat to dampen illegal immigration under the guise of "border security", it's functionally the same thing.


I'm going off of what the others said, and my statement isn't specifically regarding the comparison of those two things explicitly.

What numble said . I doubt you'll find many on even the extreme left who want open borders

It is not functionally the same thing.

People are not opposed to the wall because they support open borders, its because it is a waste of money that won't accomplish anything, and because Trump said it will be free.
 

Fercho

Member
Jan 27, 2017
529
0
285
He won't. He's obsessive, egotistical and a narcissist. He may put it on a back burner but it will come rearing up again because he can't let shit go.

Yeah, i'm actually awaiting for a twit in the next few days saying something like "Dems looney, no deal!!! Wall moving on MAGA"
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,147
2
400
It's this:


It doesn't matter if "The Wall" is constructed in its entirety or if it's just a conceptual threat. If Trump uses that threat to dampen illegal immigration under the guise of "border security", it's functionally the same thing.


I'm going off of what the others said, and my statement isn't specifically regarding the comparison of those two things explicitly.

It isn't... because trump literally wants a wall along the border and his base does too. What he settles for is s different matter.
 

Volimar

Member
Jun 11, 2011
34,722
3
685
steamcommunity.com
There's no way he's going to give up on that wall. He wants the wall. He wants his name on it. He'll consider it a monument to himself. The largest presidential monument in existence.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,747
19,832
1,910
Best Coast
It is not functionally the same thing.

People are not opposed to the wall because they support open borders, its because it is a waste of money that won't accomplish anything, and because Trump said it will be free.

I'm not talking about the merits of if it actually works or not. It doesn't matter since it's currently not real and not a physical thing, and exists only as a threat. I'm talking about it as a bargaining chip to achieve the goal of lowering illegal immigration.
 

Respect

Member
Oct 18, 2013
3,098
0
0
What

There have been reports for MONTHS that Trump is miserable. And there was a recent one where he apparently started to realize that people hate him and that he is making deals to be more liked

Yeah, I feel there is some over analysis going on here. Trump isn't that smart. He has been beloved by his base while campaigning. A lot of people knew he was a terrible person, but figured he was a clown that wouldn't get elected. So all he gets really is praise from those that love him at his rallies and indifference from many others since the belief is there is no way this joke character gets elected.

Now he is president and all the cross hairs are on him, his life is under a microscope now and everything he does is analysed to the extreme. And when he tries to appease his base, it angers most everyone else and all of the vitriol is thrown directly at trump (fake news wahhhh). The guy has a fragile ego, and he is trying to get some positive pr is what it feels like by all accounts. Will he stick with this path? I am not overly hopeful, but he's gotten more done working with dems the last week than the entire time of working with repubs up until this point.
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
I'm not talking about the merits of if it actually works or not. It doesn't matter since it's currently not real and not a physical thing, and exists only as a threat. I'm talking about it as a bargaining chip to achieve the goal of lowering illegal immigration.

Both sides agree on lowering illegal immigration and polls show there is wide support for lowering illegal immigration and increased border security. There is no wide support in Congress or the American people for a wall because it will not lower illegal immigration and it will cost taxpayers money to do nothing about the problem.

1. How to deal with people already here is a different matter.
2. How to deal with current legal immigration restrictions is a different matter.

That's why they are willing to exchange border security for leniency in dealing with people here and relaxing legal immigration restrictions, because it is not actually in conflict with 1 or 2 and because border security is actually popular and dealing with people that have not yet come across are not in conflict with 1 or 2. They are not willing to exchange a wall for 1 or 2 because a wall is not popular and will not deal with people that have not yet come across and because it will cost money but do nothing.

If the reason they were opposed to the wall was because they were in favor of open borders and in favor of new people coming across the border illegally, yes, they will also oppose border security. But very few people actually hold such positions.
 

Maridia

Member
Dec 8, 2005
1,574
1
0
I'm not talking about the merits of if it actually works or not. It doesn't matter since it's currently not real and not a physical thing, and exists only as a threat. I'm talking about it as a bargaining chip to achieve the goal of lowering illegal immigration.

For many people, the problem with The Wall isn't that it would lower illegal immigration (a lot of people actually dispute that it would do this, or wouldn't view it as a bad thing, in a vacuum), it's that it's a giant racist symbol of disdain for Mexicans.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,747
19,832
1,910
Best Coast
Both sides agree on lowering illegal immigration and polls show there is wide support for lowering illegal immigration and increased border security. There is no wide support in Congress or the American people for a wall because it will not lower illegal immigration and it will cost taxpayers money to do nothing about the problem.

1. How to deal with people already here is a different matter.
2. How to deal with current legal immigration restrictions is a different matter.

That's why they are willing to exchange border security for leniency in dealing with people here and relaxing legal immigration restrictions, because it is not actually in conflict with 1 or 2 and because border security is actually popular and dealing with people that have not yet come across are not in conflict with 1 or 2. They are not willing to exchange a wall for 1 or 2 because a wall is not popular and will not deal with people that have not yet come across and because it will cost money but do nothing.

If the reason they were opposed to the wall was because they were in favor of open borders and in favor of new people coming across the border illegally, yes, they will also oppose border security. But very few people actually hold such positions.
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about using the concept of the wall as a threat to trade for concessions.

For many people, the problem with The Wall isn't that it would lower illegal immigration (a lot of people actually dispute that it would do this, or wouldn't view it as a bad thing, in a vacuum), it's that it's a giant racist symbol of disdain for Mexicans.
I know that. I'm not talking about that.
 

numble

Member
Apr 22, 2007
28,682
0
0
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about using the concept of the wall as a threat to trade for concessions.


I know that. I'm not talking about that.

1. It isn't functionally the same thing as a wall.
2. It's not much of a threat or concession if border security is something Democrats and the population want anyway. It is already part of the main immigration reform bill.
3. It's not much of a threat if the GOP in Congress is not pushing for the wall either. He would need to veto a bill passed through the GOP Congress to really make it a threat.
 

Ishan

Junior Member
Jun 13, 2013
5,050
0
425
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about using the concept of the wall as a threat to trade for concessions.


I know that. I'm not talking about that.

no one is taking his threat of a wall too seriously. He simply doesnt have the support for it. Dems are solid no and not all repubs are on board ....

if youre asking is the bargaining chip increased clamps on illegal immigration. Most ppl are okay with trading that as most ppl are not for illegal immigrantion.
 

Shoeless

Member
Feb 12, 2010
2,469
0
0
That #AmnestyDon hashtag on Twitter is both amazing and terrifying to behold. Now that the racism is under actual threat, it's quite a sight to see the racists crawling out of the woodwork to loudly, publicly defend racism.

I think Trump has done a certain amount of permanent damage to the American psyche, and certainly to the USA's global reputation. I'm up in Canada, and have a few friends in other countries, and most of us are like, "My God, there's a LOT of racist people in the USA, but at least we can see them now..."
 

rambis

Banned
Aug 10, 2014
5,208
33
450
He made some new comments (video):

"We're working on a plan for DACA," he said. "People want to see that happen. You have 800,000 young people brought here no fault of their own. So we're working on a plan we'll see how it works out but we're going to get massive border security as part of that."

Trump also said he the top two Republicans in Congress -- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan -- were on board with his plan after he spoke with them.

"Mitch is on board. Paul Ryan's on board," he said.


lol

That didn't last long.

Trump says no "amnesty" or "citizenship" for dreamers and adds: "If we don't get the wall we will be the obstruction."

@RyanLizza Pelosi confirms Trump deal includes path to citizenship and no cuts to legal immigration.
https://twitter.com/RyanLizza/status/908342770070368256

Good god lol.
 

Telosfortelos

Advocate for the People
Dec 8, 2009
732
3
730
The freedom caucus is an opposition wing towards everything, including their party. It's not surprising they can't pass anything, despite the republican majority. It seems impossible to get republicans to unify around a single border bill, or a tax reform bill, or anything that half the party can take the most extreme position on.

The hardliners are intractable, a trait fostered and used for political gain by McConnel under Obama. We owe a lot of our political division to McConnel-style legislation that put politics over policy by flatly opposing anything dems were for and refusing to negotiate in good faith. I doubt McConnel saw how this would seep into inter-republican politicking in a way that would make it impossible for them to pass any meaningful legislation even with a majority.

Democrats are ever willing to negotiate, and when Trump negotiates, it creates a path for a Ryan and McConnel to let legislation come to vote and for a small number of Republicans to work with Trump.

If dems are reckless with their messaging, Trump won't be able to come to the table and Mitch and Ryan won't let legislation come up for consideration.
 

HP_Wuvcraft

Banned
Apr 18, 2011
33,525
1
0
wait

wait
wait
wait

Did Trump just ipso facto reneg on the border wall, the thing he promised America and spent the last seven months destroying the government over?

And did he do it with no coverage whatsoever?