Congressional failure

[Marvin the Martian]

Politico had an article (link below) on the failure of congress. They look at three areas of blame, right, left, middle. It is sure to offend everyone, which is how we know it is accurate.

The take of the right, a short excerpt:

What Roy, Trump and their ilk cannot see is that conquering the Republican Party is not the same as conquering America. A meaningful majority of Americans find their policies to be extreme, their methods odious, their leaders foolish and their vision for America untethered to reality. Their bully-boy tactics are unlikely to succeed with an evenly divided Senate, a Democratic president or even a conservative Supreme Court struggling to maintain its own legitimacy. And were they to try to seize power (again) through nefarious means, the country’s elite — judges, civil servants, state officials, military and business leaders — would do whatever it takes to stop them, just as they did on Jan. 6.​

The take of the left, a short excerpt:

In reality, America is not the progressive paradise Democrats tell themselves — and us — that it is. While a majority of Americans favor modest increases in legal immigration and a pathway to legalization for those here illegally, they don’t favor a ban on deportations or providing food, shelter, medical care and public school education for those who cross illegally. Most Americans’ response to the wave of car-jackings, store lootings and drive-by shootings isn’t to demand the end of cash bail and an all-out assault on “structural racism.” While concerned about global warming, they’re not on board with shutting down oil and gas production, paying higher prices for gas and electricity or giving up airplane travel. Even before the recent Supreme Court decision, a majority would have banned most abortions after the first trimester. And while most people have come to embrace gay rights and gay marriage, they are deeply offended at being labeled homophobic bigots because they don’t think transgender females should compete on the girls’ swim team or share locker rooms with their teenage daughters.​

And for the middle:

But perhaps the biggest reason moderates wimp out is that cooperating with the other party isn’t rewarded, at least not politically. For starters, it increases the chance of drawing a challenger in the next party primary. And no matter how closely moderates work with members of the other party, because they invariably hail from purple states and swing districts, they are almost certain to be targeted for defeat in the next election by the other party’s campaign committee. If you doubt it, just ask Peter Meijer, the freshman Republican from Michigan whose reward for having the courage to vote to impeach President Trump was to have Democrats donate $2.4 million to his victorious far-right primary opponent in the 2022 Republican primary. (The Democrats’ cynical bet paid off; they won the seat in the general election.)​

​

In the end, the centrist dream of forming a bipartisan governing majority is no more grounded in reality than the Republican fantasy of seizing power through force of will or the Democrats’ conceit that the country is behind them. Unfortunately, as long as leaders and members cling to these delusions, a dysfunctional Congress will continue to spin its wheels, sinking deeper into the rut of mindless partisanship and irrelevancy.​

​

The whole takes are far more interesting and worth a read. I am sure it will draw responses of "they nailed the other side, but we are pure as the wind-driven snow". I find the middle interesting, there is a discussion on bills the middle is working on for things like first-responder suicides, fentanyl abuse, etc. Items that have huge support, but the middle isn't even powerful enough to get these bills a committee hearing.

And of course, I'll blame non-competitive districts. If we assume, in a heavy district of one party, 60% of the district might be of one party. of them, about 50%, will vote in a primary. So that is 30% of the total population voting in a specific party's primary. To win, the candidate needs over half, so say 17% of the district's total support. So the district is represented by the winner of 17%, which typically will be the most extreme 17%. These are the left and right people above, the people who don't want to compromise but insist on my way or the highway.

Opinion | The Painful, Depressing Reality of Why Congress Is So Dysfunctional

Lawmakers will have to give up these fantasies if they want to get the House and Senate back on track.

www.politico.com

I don't have a good answer on getting more people involved who want to work to actually solve problems and not just posture. But the left and right live in some fantasy land and the middle is just toothless.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Politico had an article (link below) on the failure of congress. They look at three areas of blame, right, left, middle. It is sure to offend everyone, which is how we know it is accurate.

The take of the right, a short excerpt:

What Roy, Trump and their ilk cannot see is that conquering the Republican Party is not the same as conquering America. A meaningful majority of Americans find their policies to be extreme, their methods odious, their leaders foolish and their vision for America untethered to reality. Their bully-boy tactics are unlikely to succeed with an evenly divided Senate, a Democratic president or even a conservative Supreme Court struggling to maintain its own legitimacy. And were they to try to seize power (again) through nefarious means, the country’s elite — judges, civil servants, state officials, military and business leaders — would do whatever it takes to stop them, just as they did on Jan. 6.​

The take of the left, a short excerpt:

In reality, America is not the progressive paradise Democrats tell themselves — and us — that it is. While a majority of Americans favor modest increases in legal immigration and a pathway to legalization for those here illegally, they don’t favor a ban on deportations or providing food, shelter, medical care and public school education for those who cross illegally. Most Americans’ response to the wave of car-jackings, store lootings and drive-by shootings isn’t to demand the end of cash bail and an all-out assault on “structural racism.” While concerned about global warming, they’re not on board with shutting down oil and gas production, paying higher prices for gas and electricity or giving up airplane travel. Even before the recent Supreme Court decision, a majority would have banned most abortions after the first trimester. And while most people have come to embrace gay rights and gay marriage, they are deeply offended at being labeled homophobic bigots because they don’t think transgender females should compete on the girls’ swim team or share locker rooms with their teenage daughters.​

And for the middle:

But perhaps the biggest reason moderates wimp out is that cooperating with the other party isn’t rewarded, at least not politically. For starters, it increases the chance of drawing a challenger in the next party primary. And no matter how closely moderates work with members of the other party, because they invariably hail from purple states and swing districts, they are almost certain to be targeted for defeat in the next election by the other party’s campaign committee. If you doubt it, just ask Peter Meijer, the freshman Republican from Michigan whose reward for having the courage to vote to impeach President Trump was to have Democrats donate $2.4 million to his victorious far-right primary opponent in the 2022 Republican primary. (The Democrats’ cynical bet paid off; they won the seat in the general election.)​

​

In the end, the centrist dream of forming a bipartisan governing majority is no more grounded in reality than the Republican fantasy of seizing power through force of will or the Democrats’ conceit that the country is behind them. Unfortunately, as long as leaders and members cling to these delusions, a dysfunctional Congress will continue to spin its wheels, sinking deeper into the rut of mindless partisanship and irrelevancy.​

​

The whole takes are far more interesting and worth a read. I am sure it will draw responses of "they nailed the other side, but we are pure as the wind-driven snow". I find the middle interesting, there is a discussion on bills the middle is working on for things like first-responder suicides, fentanyl abuse, etc. Items that have huge support, but the middle isn't even powerful enough to get these bills a committee hearing.

And of course, I'll blame non-competitive districts. If we assume, in a heavy district of one party, 60% of the district might be of one party. of them, about 50%, will vote in a primary. So that is 30% of the total population voting in a specific party's primary. To win, the candidate needs over half, so say 17% of the district's total support. So the district is represented by the winner of 17%, which typically will be the most extreme 17%. These are the left and right people above, the people who don't want to compromise but insist on my way or the highway.

Opinion | The Painful, Depressing Reality of Why Congress Is So Dysfunctional

Lawmakers will have to give up these fantasies if they want to get the House and Senate back on track.

www.politico.com

I don't have a good answer on getting more people involved who want to work to actually solve problems and not just posture. But the left and right live in some fantasy land and the middle is just toothless.

wow. spot on. very sad. i still blame media for giving an outsized voice to the right and left lunacy

 

[twenty02]

Politico had an article (link below) on the failure of congress. They look at three areas of blame, right, left, middle. It is sure to offend everyone, which is how we know it is accurate.

The take of the right, a short excerpt:

What Roy, Trump and their ilk cannot see is that conquering the Republican Party is not the same as conquering America. A meaningful majority of Americans find their policies to be extreme, their methods odious, their leaders foolish and their vision for America untethered to reality. Their bully-boy tactics are unlikely to succeed with an evenly divided Senate, a Democratic president or even a conservative Supreme Court struggling to maintain its own legitimacy. And were they to try to seize power (again) through nefarious means, the country’s elite — judges, civil servants, state officials, military and business leaders — would do whatever it takes to stop them, just as they did on Jan. 6.​

The take of the left, a short excerpt:

In reality, America is not the progressive paradise Democrats tell themselves — and us — that it is. While a majority of Americans favor modest increases in legal immigration and a pathway to legalization for those here illegally, they don’t favor a ban on deportations or providing food, shelter, medical care and public school education for those who cross illegally. Most Americans’ response to the wave of car-jackings, store lootings and drive-by shootings isn’t to demand the end of cash bail and an all-out assault on “structural racism.” While concerned about global warming, they’re not on board with shutting down oil and gas production, paying higher prices for gas and electricity or giving up airplane travel. Even before the recent Supreme Court decision, a majority would have banned most abortions after the first trimester. And while most people have come to embrace gay rights and gay marriage, they are deeply offended at being labeled homophobic bigots because they don’t think transgender females should compete on the girls’ swim team or share locker rooms with their teenage daughters.​

And for the middle:

But perhaps the biggest reason moderates wimp out is that cooperating with the other party isn’t rewarded, at least not politically. For starters, it increases the chance of drawing a challenger in the next party primary. And no matter how closely moderates work with members of the other party, because they invariably hail from purple states and swing districts, they are almost certain to be targeted for defeat in the next election by the other party’s campaign committee. If you doubt it, just ask Peter Meijer, the freshman Republican from Michigan whose reward for having the courage to vote to impeach President Trump was to have Democrats donate $2.4 million to his victorious far-right primary opponent in the 2022 Republican primary. (The Democrats’ cynical bet paid off; they won the seat in the general election.)​

​

In the end, the centrist dream of forming a bipartisan governing majority is no more grounded in reality than the Republican fantasy of seizing power through force of will or the Democrats’ conceit that the country is behind them. Unfortunately, as long as leaders and members cling to these delusions, a dysfunctional Congress will continue to spin its wheels, sinking deeper into the rut of mindless partisanship and irrelevancy.​

​

The whole takes are far more interesting and worth a read. I am sure it will draw responses of "they nailed the other side, but we are pure as the wind-driven snow". I find the middle interesting, there is a discussion on bills the middle is working on for things like first-responder suicides, fentanyl abuse, etc. Items that have huge support, but the middle isn't even powerful enough to get these bills a committee hearing.

And of course, I'll blame non-competitive districts. If we assume, in a heavy district of one party, 60% of the district might be of one party. of them, about 50%, will vote in a primary. So that is 30% of the total population voting in a specific party's primary. To win, the candidate needs over half, so say 17% of the district's total support. So the district is represented by the winner of 17%, which typically will be the most extreme 17%. These are the left and right people above, the people who don't want to compromise but insist on my way or the highway.

Opinion | The Painful, Depressing Reality of Why Congress Is So Dysfunctional

Lawmakers will have to give up these fantasies if they want to get the House and Senate back on track.

www.politico.com

I don't have a good answer on getting more people involved who want to work to actually solve problems and not just posture. But the left and right live in some fantasy land and the middle is just toothless.

Only thing normal people can attempt to do is actively participate in primaries of both parties and consistently vote for the most moderate option in an attempt to thwart the crazies.

Unfortunately participation in primary elections is low, and typically overrun by the loony activists. Normal people have jobs, families and lives unlike the weird goobers you will find at your local political party meetings.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Politico had an article (link below) on the failure of congress. They look at three areas of blame, right, left, middle. It is sure to offend everyone, which is how we know it is accurate.

The take of the right, a short excerpt:

What Roy, Trump and their ilk cannot see is that conquering the Republican Party is not the same as conquering America. A meaningful majority of Americans find their policies to be extreme, their methods odious, their leaders foolish and their vision for America untethered to reality. Their bully-boy tactics are unlikely to succeed with an evenly divided Senate, a Democratic president or even a conservative Supreme Court struggling to maintain its own legitimacy. And were they to try to seize power (again) through nefarious means, the country’s elite — judges, civil servants, state officials, military and business leaders — would do whatever it takes to stop them, just as they did on Jan. 6.​

The take of the left, a short excerpt:

In reality, America is not the progressive paradise Democrats tell themselves — and us — that it is. While a majority of Americans favor modest increases in legal immigration and a pathway to legalization for those here illegally, they don’t favor a ban on deportations or providing food, shelter, medical care and public school education for those who cross illegally. Most Americans’ response to the wave of car-jackings, store lootings and drive-by shootings isn’t to demand the end of cash bail and an all-out assault on “structural racism.” While concerned about global warming, they’re not on board with shutting down oil and gas production, paying higher prices for gas and electricity or giving up airplane travel. Even before the recent Supreme Court decision, a majority would have banned most abortions after the first trimester. And while most people have come to embrace gay rights and gay marriage, they are deeply offended at being labeled homophobic bigots because they don’t think transgender females should compete on the girls’ swim team or share locker rooms with their teenage daughters.​

And for the middle:

But perhaps the biggest reason moderates wimp out is that cooperating with the other party isn’t rewarded, at least not politically. For starters, it increases the chance of drawing a challenger in the next party primary. And no matter how closely moderates work with members of the other party, because they invariably hail from purple states and swing districts, they are almost certain to be targeted for defeat in the next election by the other party’s campaign committee. If you doubt it, just ask Peter Meijer, the freshman Republican from Michigan whose reward for having the courage to vote to impeach President Trump was to have Democrats donate $2.4 million to his victorious far-right primary opponent in the 2022 Republican primary. (The Democrats’ cynical bet paid off; they won the seat in the general election.)​

​

In the end, the centrist dream of forming a bipartisan governing majority is no more grounded in reality than the Republican fantasy of seizing power through force of will or the Democrats’ conceit that the country is behind them. Unfortunately, as long as leaders and members cling to these delusions, a dysfunctional Congress will continue to spin its wheels, sinking deeper into the rut of mindless partisanship and irrelevancy.​

​

The whole takes are far more interesting and worth a read. I am sure it will draw responses of "they nailed the other side, but we are pure as the wind-driven snow". I find the middle interesting, there is a discussion on bills the middle is working on for things like first-responder suicides, fentanyl abuse, etc. Items that have huge support, but the middle isn't even powerful enough to get these bills a committee hearing.

And of course, I'll blame non-competitive districts. If we assume, in a heavy district of one party, 60% of the district might be of one party. of them, about 50%, will vote in a primary. So that is 30% of the total population voting in a specific party's primary. To win, the candidate needs over half, so say 17% of the district's total support. So the district is represented by the winner of 17%, which typically will be the most extreme 17%. These are the left and right people above, the people who don't want to compromise but insist on my way or the highway.

Opinion | The Painful, Depressing Reality of Why Congress Is So Dysfunctional

Lawmakers will have to give up these fantasies if they want to get the House and Senate back on track.

www.politico.com

I don't have a good answer on getting more people involved who want to work to actually solve problems and not just posture. But the left and right live in some fantasy land and the middle is just toothless.

That seems like really weak sauce. The problems with congress are in operations, not political Issues.

Here are the problems with congress i see in no particular order.

Too much power in leadership. Stuff doesn’t get debated or voted unless the leaders consent. Members get screwed in committees and funding if they don’t vote as leadership demands.

Omnibus spending bills.

Thousand+ page bills with no opportunity to debate, or even read.

Christmas tree multi-subject legislation.

Risk-averse members and leadership who won’t take a controversial vote during election years.

Too many investigations.

Too much legalized corruption.

 

[mcmurtry66]

That seems like really weak sauce. The problems with congress are in operations, not political Issues.

Here are the problems with congress i see in no particular order.

Too much power in leadership. Stuff doesn’t get debated or voted unless the leaders consent. Members get screwed in committees and funding if they don’t vote as leadership demands.

Omnibus spending bills.

Thousand+ page bills with no opportunity to debate, or even read.

Christmas tree multi-subject legislation.

Risk-averse members and leadership who won’t take a controversial vote during election years.

Too many investigations.

Too much legalized corruption.

hard to argue with your points in theory, particularly the bills. unfortunately with so much unwillingness to cooperate addressing broken up bills (which is what we should have) would lead to even less getting done. now that is probably a good thing however....

 

[CO. Hoosier]

hard to argue with your points in theory, particularly the bills. unfortunately with so much unwillingness to cooperate addressing broken up bills (which is what we should have) would lead to even less getting done. now that is probably a good thing however....

It took a while to get here. The fix will take a while too. I think we start with better people running. That means the Boebert‘s and Cori Bush’s of the world need to go.

 

[mcmurtry66]

It took a while to get here. The fix will take a while too. I think we start with better people running. That means the Boebert‘s and Cori Bush’s of the world need to go.

cori bush will hopefully be out. need to start hammering the squad. county prosecutor is running against bush. black guy. woke. but wayyyyyy smarter and much more reasonable and sensible than bush. supports israel etc. also a nice guy fwiw

 

[Marvin the Martian]

That seems like really weak sauce. The problems with congress are in operations, not political Issues.

Here are the problems with congress i see in no particular order.

Too much power in leadership. Stuff doesn’t get debated or voted unless the leaders consent. Members get screwed in committees and funding if they don’t vote as leadership demands.

Omnibus spending bills.

Thousand+ page bills with no opportunity to debate, or even read.

Christmas tree multi-subject legislation.

Risk-averse members and leadership who won’t take a controversial vote during election years.

Too many investigations.

Too much legalized corruption.

Operational problems are created by political problems. There are a host of issues with huge bipartisan support. Here is one:

Americans broadly support legal status for immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children

91% of Democrats favor granting legal status to immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children; 54% of Republicans say the same.

www.pewresearch.org

Polls show 74% of Americans want Dreamers to be made Americans, and that includes 54% of Republicans. Yet that bill never comes up for a vote because it doesn't have votes. It doesn't have the votes because the far right doesn't want it and the far left wants the issue. That is political, not operative. Everyone up and down the line knows to fight for it means getting primaried.

Every vote is meta gaming. It isn't "Is this good for America?", it is "How does THIS vote set us up to win on X, Y, and Z?". You mention further down Bush and Boebert, neither are leadership.

So while I agree there are operational issues (seniority is a reasonably new invention that didn't exist in Lincoln's day and should be eliminated). But us purposely choosing people that WANT to govern, that WANT to work with others and deal in a fair give and take.

By the way, Bush is in a heavy D district. Boebert is in R+7, so fairly Republican.

I am growing convinced proportional representation is the solution. Election takes place, Republican gets 55% of the vote and Democrat 45. Both go, on bills the Republicans vote counts as .55, the D and .45. With that, every percentage gain is an increase in power for the representative so they have great incentive to reach across the aisle. If they can win over moderates and independents, they might get .1 or more of a vote. That is more power/influence. Every vote matters. Winning a heavily partisan district with 53% of the vote is leaving a lot of influence on the table. If both parties really submit losers and the Libertarians get .1%, that weakens the two major parties for submitting losers.

Proportional Representation Can Reduce the Impact of Gerrymandering

Implementing multimember districts is one possible response to partisan gerrymandering.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Operational problems are created by political problems. There are a host of issues with huge bipartisan support. Here is one:

Americans broadly support legal status for immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children

91% of Democrats favor granting legal status to immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children; 54% of Republicans say the same.

www.pewresearch.org

Polls show 74% of Americans want Dreamers to be made Americans, and that includes 54% of Republicans. Yet that bill never comes up for a vote because it doesn't have votes. It doesn't have the votes because the far right doesn't want it and the far left wants the issue. That is political, not operative. Everyone up and down the line knows to fight for it means getting primaried.

Every vote is meta gaming. It isn't "Is this good for America?", it is "How does THIS vote set us up to win on X, Y, and Z?". You mention further down Bush and Boebert, neither are leadership.

So while I agree there are operational issues (seniority is a reasonably new invention that didn't exist in Lincoln's day and should be eliminated). But us purposely choosing people that WANT to govern, that WANT to work with others and deal in a fair give and take.

By the way, Bush is in a heavy D district. Boebert is in R+7, so fairly Republican.

I am growing convinced proportional representation is the solution. Election takes place, Republican gets 55% of the vote and Democrat 45. Both go, on bills the Republicans vote counts as .55, the D and .45. With that, every percentage gain is an increase in power for the representative so they have great incentive to reach across the aisle. If they can win over moderates and independents, they might get .1 or more of a vote. That is more power/influence. Every vote matters. Winning a heavily partisan district with 53% of the vote is leaving a lot of influence on the table. If both parties really submit losers and the Libertarians get .1%, that weakens the two major parties for submitting losers.

Proportional Representation Can Reduce the Impact of Gerrymandering

Implementing multimember districts is one possible response to partisan gerrymandering.

www.brennancenter.org

Trump offered a dreamer path to citizenship in exchange for wall funding during negotiations. Pelosi told him to go to hell.

 

[ButHerEmails]

Only thing normal people can attempt to do is actively participate in primaries of both parties and consistently vote for the most moderate option in an attempt to thwart the crazies.

Unfortunately participation in primary elections is low, and typically overrun by the loony activists. Normal people have jobs, families and lives unlike the weird goobers you will find at your local political party meetings.

Which is why voting needs to take place for at least 30 days and available on weekends. I’m sure voting only on Tuesday was fine when this country had 500 people and they were all farmers.

 

[TomEric4756]

Trump offered a dreamer path to citizenship in exchange for wall funding during negotiations. Pelosi told him to go to hell.

Yes, my presumption is that Pelosi wanted Democrats to get credit for creating new citizens and voters from dreamers… In an expectation that they would loyally vote Democrats in to office. It seems many Hispanics no longer believe today’s Democrats represent their traditional values. (How else does a Republican son of a Democratic mayor become mayor of Miami, a former Democratic stronghold).

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Trump offered a dreamer path to citizenship in exchange for wall funding during negotiations. Pelosi told him to go to hell.

An incentive to citizenship in perhaps ten to twelve years. Trump gets his wall, the next Republican president kills the "incentive to citizenship". No one in their right mind would accept that.

Trump proposed a ‘Dreamer’ pathway to citizenship — Democrats said ‘no’

The irony is that it was Democrats, not Republicans, who killed the last, best chance to create that pathway, at least for “Dreamers.”

www.google.com

 

[Spartans9312]

An incentive to citizenship in perhaps ten to twelve years. Trump gets his wall, the next Republican president kills the "incentive to citizenship". No one in their right mind would accept that.

Trump proposed a ‘Dreamer’ pathway to citizenship — Democrats said ‘no’

The irony is that it was Democrats, not Republicans, who killed the last, best chance to create that pathway, at least for “Dreamers.”

www.google.com

Sounds like “spending cuts”

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Sounds like “spending cuts”

Indeed, you shouldn't accept spending cuts in 5 years for some vote today. That would be stupid. This is why we need a vote to both cut spending and raise revenue at the same time.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

An incentive to citizenship in perhaps ten to twelve years. Trump gets his wall, the next Republican president kills the "incentive to citizenship". No one in their right mind would accept that.

Trump proposed a ‘Dreamer’ pathway to citizenship — Democrats said ‘no’

The irony is that it was Democrats, not Republicans, who killed the last, best chance to create that pathway, at least for “Dreamers.”

www.google.com

Stop it! You sound like Pelosi.

Trump tried to negotiate policy. The Dems only want to dictate policy.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Stop it! You sound like Pelosi.

Trump tried to negotiate policy. The Dems only want to dictate policy.

Prove Trump was willing to negotiate that and not dictate it. Show me the meeting emails, transcripts of calls, etc, PROVING BEYOND DOUBT he was willing to drop the 10-12 year wait. This is your chance, PROVE IT or YOU STOP IT.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Prove Trump was willing to negotiate that and not dictate it. Show me the meeting emails, transcripts of calls, etc, PROVING BEYOND DOUBT he was willing to drop the 10-12 year wait. This is your chance, PROVE IT or YOU STOP IT.

This is not a red-light/green light-argument. All we have to go on is what happened in other contexts. Several important policy accomplishments during the Trump years were a negotiation, including remain in m Mexico, and the Northern Triangle agreements; the USMCA: the Criminal Justice Reform; The Significant changes in the tax Code; and NATO members living up to NATO commitments. He even negotiated with the Taliban and Kim Jong-un. Pelosi never negotiated any important disputed policy with Trump.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

This is not a red-light/green light-argument. All we have to go on is what happened in other contexts. Several important policy accomplishments during the Trump years were a negotiation, including remain in m Mexico, and the Northern Triangle agreements; the USMCA: the Criminal Justice Reform; The Significant changes in the tax Code; and NATO members living up to NATO commitments. He even negotiated with the Taliban and Kim Jong-un. Pelosi never negotiated any important disputed policy with Trump.

What Trump was doing was meta-gaming. He wanted to get something his party wants (the wall) by offering up something his party wants (pathway to citizenship. Polls do show a majority of Republicans (let alone Democrats and Independents) want Dreamers dealt with. I don't understand how any Democrat negotiates that in good faith. "Yes, we will give you two things you want, in exchange I get one thing I want and one thing I do not want." If that works, I suspect we both want to see Napoleon. Let's both go, AND you give me $1000. Can't blame a guy for trying.

NEW POLL: Overwhelming Majority of U.S. Voters Across Political Spectrum Support Legislation for Dreamers Paired with Border Security

WASHINGTON, DC – FWD.us today released a new poll commissioned by FWD.us and conducted jointly by Republican and Democratic public research firms showing that there is strong, bipartisan support for legislation that would pair an earned path to citizenship for Dreamers with investments in border...

www.fwd.us

By a more than 4:1 margin, voters overall support a proposal that would create an earned path to citizenship for Dreamers (80% support / 16% oppose). The proposal garners majority support among Democrats (93% support), Independents (74% support), and Republicans (71% support).​

​

Poll: Trump voters want to protect Dreamers

A new POLITICO/Morning Consult survey finds those who voted for the president want to shield certain immigrants from deportation.

www.politico.com

A majority of Trump voters want to protect so-called Dreamers from deportation, according to a new poll, putting pressure on President Donald Trump to shield immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children.​

​

The same trend holds across all Republicans, according to the findings from the latest POLITICO/Morning Consult poll. In fact, the poll indicates that wide swaths of registered voters support Dreamers regardless of gender, education, income, ethnicity, religion and ideology. That includes 68 percent of Republicans, 71 percent of conservatives and 64 percent of those who approve of the job Trump is doing. Even 69 percent of those who voted for Trump in 2016 — when he vowed to deport Dreamers — say they should be protected.​

​

To get a wall, something not at all popular in the Democratic Party, something far more than "a pathway for 10-12 years" has to be offered. Otherwise, send me the $1000 and I'll let you know what I think of Napoleon. I do like negotiations, but they have to start in the reality-based community.

 

[mrhighlife]

Lol. This thread got buried. Pretty good indicator that the article was spot on.