• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If Nancy is doing her job and Donald is doing his...

Ban guns? LOL!!

Nonsense.

Are you forgetting that little thing called the Bill Of Rights? I suggest you look at the Second Amendment. Yes, it says "Congress", but no court will say a President isn't covered also.

But there is no Amendment that prevents Trump from declaring a national emergency because of the humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border.

The trump parrots. First it was a national emergency because of the drugs, ms13, rapists etc. Then it turned into a humanitarian crisis because the chief parrott said so. Do the folks on the right ever have an original thought? My point wasn't about guns, it was about the right loves the idea of trump using his executive powers, be careful that the dems don't do the same on issues that matter to them.
 
Will the government ever open again?

My thought is Nancy and Chuck are doing exactly what 53 million Americans that voted in the midterms want them to do.

While Donald is doing what 62 million Americans that voted in 2016 wanted him to do.

How can this ever end without either sides feeling as if they got burnt?
I don't know the answer but what I do know is we need to pay the people that are working on our behalf and those that can not get jobs due to their government contract anything else is ridiculous.
What are your thoughts on this?

I don’t think shutting down the government is something anyone wants except Trump.
 
Will the government ever open again?

My thought is Nancy and Chuck are doing exactly what 53 million Americans that voted in the midterms want them to do.

While Donald is doing what 62 million Americans that voted in 2016 wanted him to do.

How can this ever end without either sides feeling as if they got burnt?
I don't know the answer but what I do know is we need to pay the people that are working on our behalf and those that can not get jobs due to their government contract anything else is ridiculous.
What are your thoughts on this?

Donald had 2 years to do his job. He didn't. Now he's stirring up his base pretending that this is all of a sudden Chuck and Nancy's fault. The smart people see right through it.
 
I don’t think shutting down the government is something anyone wants except Trump.

His hotels are making money and he can pull money from his businesses whenever he wants...so yeah, he doesn't give a ****.
 
Will the government ever open again?

My thought is Nancy and Chuck are doing exactly what 53 million Americans that voted in the midterms want them to do.

While Donald is doing what 62 million Americans that voted in 2016 wanted him to do.

How can this ever end without either sides feeling as if they got burnt?
I don't know the answer but what I do know is we need to pay the people that are working on our behalf and those that can not get jobs due to their government contract anything else is ridiculous.
What are your thoughts on this?

And Trump and the Republican Senate are doing just what Americans voted them to do. Are you saying that since the midterms turned the House Democratic then the rest of the government has to rubber stamp everything from the House? Let's not forget that midterm voters increased Republican control in the Senate.
 
Last edited:
The trump parrots. First it was a national emergency because of the drugs, ms13, rapists etc. Then it turned into a humanitarian crisis because the chief parrott said so. Do the folks on the right ever have an original thought? My point wasn't about guns, it was about the right loves the idea of trump using his executive powers, be careful that the dems don't do the same on issues that matter to them.

A Dem President has ALWAYS had the power to declare national emergencies...just as Trump does. Hell, Obama has declared national emergencies. So, it's a hollow threat to say that "If Trump does it, so will the Dems."

btw, you can take your broad anti-right brush and shove it where the sun don't shine. I speak for my self...not for any other group.
 
One shutdown per month minimum if he wins this one.
The list of things he is willing to do a shutdown for is practically endless.

Yup. He's a hostage taker willing to shut down the government over new policy. Even a scintilla of a whiff of a win for him on this will only encourage his continued battery.

If there's any value in this thing, it is that Congress has an opportunity to reassert its natural and constitutional role.

That's going to take a lot of spine and zero help from the senate.
 
Stereotype much?

Btw, it is up to congress and the POTUS to compromise and get the government going again. That's their job.

Shutting down the government over new policy, new spending is a non-starter.

Trump owns this shutdown, and what you think is an obligation to compromise is actually a concession to hostage taking.

We should have learned from the Republicans in the Reagan years not to trade arms for hostages. It encourages bad behavior going forward.

It appears so far that the Speaker remembers this lesson.
 
Ban guns? LOL!!

Nonsense.

Are you forgetting that little thing called the Bill Of Rights? I suggest you look at the Second Amendment. Yes, it says "Congress", but no court will say a President isn't covered also.

But there is no Amendment that prevents Trump from declaring a national emergency because of the humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border.

Second Amendment says "Congress"?

News to me.
 
A Dem President has ALWAYS had the power to declare national emergencies...just as Trump does. Hell, Obama has declared national emergencies. So, it's a hollow threat to say that "If Trump does it, so will the Dems."

btw, you can take your broad anti-right brush and shove it where the sun don't shine. I speak for my self...not for any other group.

Remember when Obama declared an emergency to get the ACA passed?

Remember when Clinton declared an emergency to get NAFTA passed?

Remember when W declared an emergency to get his tax cuts passed?

Neither do I.

Some folks have bought into the notion that the power to do something is excuse to exercise it. It is not.
What has changed since October 2018 that makes this now an emergency?

The thing that has changed is Nancy Pelosi grabbing Donald Trump by his *****.

That does not a national emergency make.
 
Ban guns? LOL!!

Nonsense.

Are you forgetting that little thing called the Bill Of Rights? I suggest you look at the Second Amendment. Yes, it says "Congress", but no court will say a President isn't covered also.

But there is no Amendment that prevents Trump from declaring a national emergency because of the humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border.

You are correct, there is however, the National Emergencies Act which would trigger all kinds of interesting legal discussions that would go on for years. Trump has been talking about this national emergency angle for weeks, why has he not declared it already if it's such an easy path?

And as a point of reference, during the Katrina national emergency, firearms were legally confiscated and civilians were prohibited from carrying firearms... All legal under a national emergency declaration...
 
Second Amendment says "Congress"?

News to me.


???

Did you actually read my post?

~snipped the irrelevant and, frankly, disrespectful nonsense~

That does not a national emergency make.

That's your opinion. Trump has his opinion.

But he is the one who is the President. He is the one with the power to declare a national emergency.

If you don't like it, take him to court (if you think you have standing). Otherwise, your only option is to not vote for him in 2020.

Oh...wait...I forgot. You can also scream into the night sky.
 
A Dem President has ALWAYS had the power to declare national emergencies...just as Trump does. Hell, Obama has declared national emergencies. So, it's a hollow threat to say that "If Trump does it, so will the Dems."

btw, you can take your broad anti-right brush and shove it where the sun don't shine. I speak for my self...not for any other group.

I can't, I love my brush, I've been using it for decades. And it's not broad, it's accurate. Look at the folks on the right and what they support. Nixon/Agnew, we don't even need to say anything other than their names. Ford, pardoned nixon so the country could heal, yeah, right. The democrats wanted them in jail but one GOP member gave another GOP member a free pass. Then we had saint ron and star wars running up our debt while saying he had nothing to do with iran contra. And the markets crashed under him. Then we had the famous W that we all loved. He got us into a war with a series of lies even somehow talked colin powell into sullying his reputation if front of the united nations and now we have trump. To me, that is not a record to be proud about.
 
You are correct, there is however, the National Emergencies Act which would trigger all kinds of interesting legal discussions that would go on for years. Trump has been talking about this national emergency angle for weeks, why has he not declared it already if it's such an easy path?

For sure...there will be "legal discussion" if Trump takes that route. The only ones that matter, however, are the ones that take place in a court.

As to why Trump hasn't taken that step already, I don't know. I've thought he should, but it's his decision. But I've given a possible reason. Don't know if that's correct, but it could be.

And as a point of reference, during the Katrina national emergency, firearms were legally confiscated and civilians were prohibited from carrying firearms... All legal under a national emergency declaration...

Actually, the confiscation during Katrina was not done under the authority of a national emergency declaration. It was done as the result of a decision from local New Orleans officials.

Here is an article to get you up to speed on that issue, as well as court actions that resulted: https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...-confiscation-can-and-has-happened-in-america
 
I can't, I love my brush, I've been using it for decades.

~snip~

Well, be prepared for major snippage when applying your broad anti-right brush to me.
 
Well, be prepared for major snippage when applying your broad anti-right brush to me.

That will be ok, take anything I say out of context if it makes you feel better. It's nothing new. Big beautiful wall that mexico is paying for. That has been reduced by those on the right to the liberals won't pay for the wall and are responsible for the government shut down. So you go right ahead and snip away.
 
For sure...there will be "legal discussion" if Trump takes that route. The only ones that matter, however, are the ones that take place in a court.

As to why Trump hasn't taken that step already, I don't know. I've thought he should, but it's his decision. But I've given a possible reason. Don't know if that's correct, but it could be.

LOL.. The discussions will take place in court and congress... Then every member of the GOP will be on record as having voted to sustain the national emergency or not...


Actually, the confiscation during Katrina was not done under the authority of a national emergency declaration. It was done as the result of a decision from local New Orleans officials.

Here is an article to get you up to speed on that issue, as well as court actions that resulted: https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...-confiscation-can-and-has-happened-in-america


Oddly, the confiscations continue...

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nra-thre...irgin-islands-governor-orders-weapons-seizure
 
LOL.. The discussions will take place in court and congress... Then every member of the GOP will be on record as having voted to sustain the national emergency or not...

As will every Democrat.

In any case, I think any action from Congress is meaningless. Do you think Congress will be able to pass a joint resolution disputing Trump's national emergency? Do you think Trump will sign the joint resolution? Do you think Congress could override a Presidential veto on such a joint resolution? I don't think any of that would happen.

That leaves the courts.

Oddly, the confiscations continue...

I don't find that odd at all. Lots of people condone...or actually take part in...violations of the 2nd Amendment and other laws.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nra-thre...irgin-islands-governor-orders-weapons-seizure[/QUOTE]
 
As will every Democrat.

In any case, I think any action from Congress is meaningless. Do you think Congress will be able to pass a joint resolution disputing Trump's national emergency? Do you think Trump will sign the joint resolution? Do you think Congress could override a Presidential veto on such a joint resolution? I don't think any of that would happen.

That leaves the courts.



I don't find that odd at all. Lots of people condone...or actually take part in...violations of the 2nd Amendment and other laws.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nra-thre...irgin-islands-governor-orders-weapons-seizure

Regardless of the outcome, it will be a very public airing of the positions of each house member and senator. There is nothing Trump can do to stop it or McConnell can do to delay or stall the vote. The law is crystal clear...
 
Regardless of the outcome, it will be a very public airing of the positions of each house member and senator. There is nothing Trump can do to stop it or McConnell can do to delay or stall the vote. The law is crystal clear...

I prefer that every Representative and Senator publicly present their position. That's the way I like it.

Heck, I think Trump likes it that way, as well, so I don't see him doing anything to stop it.
 
I prefer that every Representative and Senator publicly present their position. That's the way I like it.

Heck, I think Trump likes it that way, as well, so I don't see him doing anything to stop it.

Me too! Why will McConnell not allow the senate to state their position through voting on the bill passed by the house? Let the president veto the bill..
 
Do you think everything any President is voted in for, is accomplished in the first two years? Did all promises Obama make happen in the first two years.

I keep seeing this little complaint pop up and it makes no sense. It would be a valid complaint if nothing was accomplished, but he has done what he promised so far. Whether someone likes it or not is a different argument.

So when the next President is elected, D or R, you will expect all promises made while a candidate, be accomplished within the first two years, right?

I never said they didn't get anything accomplished. If you think I did, please show me where.

What I DID argue was that if this is the most dire problem the country faces right now, why the hell wasn't it more of a priority when they could have done basically whatever they wanted to to solve it?

I would expect that the first two years of a Presidents term that they would focus on what they consider to be the most important issues they see. They may not get it all accomplished, but they could at least give the air that they actually meant what they said. And if they have total control of the government when they get in, yes, I expect even more.

You notice that in the first two years of Obamas first term, he focused on fulfilling his campaign promise of healthcare reform while he had control of the Congress. Agree or disagree with that legislation, you can't say that he wasted that time from a strategic standpoint.
 
Me too! Why will McConnell not allow the senate to state their position through voting on the bill passed by the house? Let the president veto the bill..

Why are you asking me?

McConnell has already given you his reason.
 
???

Did you actually read my post?


<snip>argle blargle.</snip>

Yeah, I did. I notice you didn't quote it.

Are you forgetting that little thing called the Bill Of Rights? I suggest you look at the Second Amendment. Yes, it says "Congress", but no court will say a President isn't covered also.

Where does the Second amendment mention congress? Or is the writing so bad in this sentence that the "it" refers to something entirely out of context?
 
Back
Top Bottom