Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247) |
Author: Dope1   😊 😞
Number: of 84362 
Subject: Re: Trump: I Would Encourage Russia...
Date: 02/13/24 3:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 2
That's the point of a messaging bill - if you've drafted the bill reasonably enough that you get votes from the opposing party, you've done it wrong.

Yeah, there were controversial things in it like making sure CBP officers were carrying radios. :)

But what does that get you?
Just read the responses in this thread. The democrats are getting roasted on the border (despite years of saying there was no problem) and the polls are showing it. They know their coalition doesn't support ANY increases in security whatsoever so they're playing the only card they have at the moment: blame the GOP for their failings.

Again, just read the responses in this thread: all of them from the left side of the aisle are pushing the unified premise that the deal is dead because "MAGA killed it" with the secondary theme that "there is no possible way to get anything this good on security for decades". This requires one to accept the dual premises that

1. This bill was a good bill (it wasn't, as documented by me on this board)
2. The democrats are absolved from any responsibility for negotiating in good faith in the future.

The play the democrats will make will be to pretend their bill of normalizing loads of migrants was a Golden Bill that Trump killed for political reasons and thus invoke #2 as a way to avoid future responsibility.

Why would Trump allow that? Why not get ahead of it by laying out bait that he knows the dems will take and force them into a predictable situation? You win lots of football games and win wars with deception.

You still don't have the ability to do anything about the border. You still have the hundreds of thousands of asylees in the country for years, waiting for their hearings. And in the conservative theory of the border, that will encourage even more people to come to the border.

I gain addition by subtraction. By (correctly) labeling the democrats as the party that refuses to secure America's border, I get...fewer democrats. As the beatings continue, they're more...motivated...to actually come to the table and talk solutions.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to Dope1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community