Post #14208 by onepoorguy on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (75)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 3

No, the Dems were at the bargaining table because they wanted to support Ukraine, and stick it to Russia. If not for that, the Dems would never have been willing to swallow what was on offer. In fact, the Latino Caucus and some on the far left weren't willing to swallow it regardless. But they were small enough that they would have been outvoted.

And I know you keep harping on "locking in" numbers. What you don't seem to grok is that at least it was a number. Right now, the "locked-in" number is a lemniscate (i.e. infinity). The entirety of the human population could cross the border, and we can do nothing about it. "Locking in" a number less than that probably was a good idea.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (75)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.