U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 01:30 PM
 
17,325 posts, read 11,643,967 times
Reputation: 9233

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobo1 View Post
Both sides - R and D - seem to want to eradicate the other. What issues would you be willing to make reasonable compromises on and how so? I'm assuming if you are an independent there are issues you would be willing to compromise on. I'm curious if everyday people are as far apart as our representatives seem to be.

For me, I'm ok with the abortion laws as they are. I see that as an existing compromise.

I think there is some room to compromise on gun control in terms of mental health checks and private sales. The trouble is figuring out a common sense way to do it that is actually productive.

There is plenty of room to compromise in terms of border security imo, but one side seems to be fixated on the wall while the other seems to want nothing to do with border security at all.

Federal budget: Tons of room for compromise there. I'd willing to give up more than enough military spending to pay for the wall and plenty of other things.


For rational people, there is room for compromise on every issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Wappingers Falls, NY
1,543 posts, read 1,875,795 times
Reputation: 1005
The one thing neither side is willing to compromise on is granting the other side anything that might be seen as a political victory. Which is the root of the problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:13 PM
 
4,731 posts, read 1,341,778 times
Reputation: 2802
Quote:
Originally Posted by npaladin2000 View Post
The one thing neither side is willing to compromise on is granting the other side anything that might be seen as a political victory. Which is the root of the problem.
Well, the Democrats are apparently sending a comprehensive border security proposal without wall funding to Trump today. If the Democrats can re-frame the debate as Democrats in favor of billions for technologically advanced border security with manpower support v. Republicans in favor of billions for a 700 mile border wall accompanied by decades of eminent domain cases, the Republicans are toast. The campaign adds will practically write themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:26 PM
 
Location: my little town
895 posts, read 301,478 times
Reputation: 1014
The wall. As the nation splits apart, Texas-Oklahoma is likely to be one of the new nations, and later it will get annexed by Mexico. Putting the wall around Texas-Oklahoma instead of at the Mexican border makes as much sense as anything else in politics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Wappingers Falls, NY
1,543 posts, read 1,875,795 times
Reputation: 1005
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
Well, the Democrats are apparently sending a comprehensive border security proposal without wall funding to Trump today. If the Democrats can re-frame the debate as Democrats in favor of billions for technologically advanced border security with manpower support v. Republicans in favor of billions for a 700 mile border wall accompanied by decades of eminent domain cases, the Republicans are toast. The campaign adds will practically write themselves.
Unlikely. First of all, I'm not sure the Democrats even want border security in the first place. For another, "technologically advanced border security" is a meaningless phrase unless it includes details. And unless there's some sort of physical barrier included, it's not going to be workable at all (you can have drones and cameras and sensors all over the place, but people will figure out how to spoof all that). But, as you pointed out, the Democrats don't want to give in on anything that the Republicans can refer to as a "wall," which will pretty much include any physical barrier they can remotely get away with calling a "wall." Fence? Must be a "wall." Natural mountain or canyon barrier? Oops, that's a "wall."

As long as each side insists on not handing the other a policial victory there's a problem. Eventually they're going to just have to be satisfied with both sides ending up with a partial political victory. But no one's interested in that yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Little Rock, AR
2,550 posts, read 780,943 times
Reputation: 1547
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
Well, the Democrats are apparently sending a comprehensive border security proposal without wall funding to Trump today. If the Democrats can re-frame the debate as Democrats in favor of billions for technologically advanced border security with manpower support v. Republicans in favor of billions for a 700 mile border wall accompanied by decades of eminent domain cases, the Republicans are toast. The campaign adds will practically write themselves.
This is like beating a dead horse but why did the democrats vote on building barriers in 2006 and are calling it immoral today? You would argue the border is more secure without a barrier wall than with? It’s an indefensible argument, listen to the border patrol agents that work on the border
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Union County, North Carolina
5,259 posts, read 6,474,528 times
Reputation: 4481
I'd re-submit Pelosi's offer plus a $56,000 Taco Bell gift card and an unlimited supply of Hamberder Helper!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:32 PM
 
11,211 posts, read 5,324,445 times
Reputation: 6384
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
But it wasn't a permanent solution. And in three years we could be back in this same position. Meanwhile, he gets his money, and we the DACA kids get bupkus or deported.
IF you are really a DACA kid, then you are perfectly aware that a “permanent solution” is more than just deport or not deport. Bush had 8 years and couldn’t get it done. Obama had 8 years (2 with a super Majority) and wouldn’t get it done. The executive memo that Obama signed is going to lose in the US Supreme Court, we know this because the similar DAPA already lost.

President Trump has given 2 years worth of extensions for Congress to pass Legislation to “save” the DACA people. Without that Legislation, there WILL be deportations. He has just offered another 3 year extension.

It must be crystal clear at this point that the last thing in the world that the Leftists want is a DACA Solution. Nancy Pelosi continues to say DACA is off the table.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:33 PM
Status: "do-si-yay!" (set 9 days ago)
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
1,560 posts, read 253,550 times
Reputation: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t
Did you say that when Obama signed it? I did. I noted that DACA was bringing affected people 'out of the shadows,' putting their names on a list, and into a system that could be reversed by the next president with stroke of pen.

If you did make note of that at the time, we're in agreement. Otherwise you're another poster playing partisan ping pong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
Obama wouldn't have kicked out the Dreamers. And he also wanted to expand citizens to non-citizens, but didn't get very far. Trump doesn't want a path to citizenship for anyone. He even has a problem with legal immigrants.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...umn/815592002/
All that's beside the point. Obama knew that he was limited to 2 terms, yet he enacted a system by exec order that could be reversed by the next president by stroke of pen. Obama had the trifecta in 2008, and could have passed immigration reform the right way, with Congress involved. Done that way, it would have been virtually impossible for Trump to reverse.

Also, you did not answer my question in your response to my post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:35 PM
 
4,731 posts, read 1,341,778 times
Reputation: 2802
Quote:
Originally Posted by npaladin2000 View Post
Unlikely. First of all, I'm not sure the Democrats even want border security in the first place. For another, "technologically advanced border security" is a meaningless phrase unless it includes details. And unless there's some sort of physical barrier included, it's not going to be workable at all (you can have drones and cameras and sensors all over the place, but people will figure out how to spoof all that). But, as you pointed out, the Democrats don't want to give in on anything that the Republicans can refer to as a "wall," which will pretty much include any physical barrier they can remotely get away with calling a "wall." Fence? Must be a "wall." Natural mountain or canyon barrier? Oops, that's a "wall."

As long as each side insists on not handing the other a policial victory there's a problem. Eventually they're going to just have to be satisfied with both sides ending up with a partial political victory. But no one's interested in that yet.
Well, they apparently sent a specific proposal today so its not just meaningless or unspecific.

Democrats might not want to give Trump a wall and have been painted as being against border security, but as I said, if they can re-frame the public debate as "we [Democrats] are offering opening up the government with billions for border security in the form of technology, manpower, immigration judges, checkpoints, and strategic barriers and Trump turned it down because he wants a $6 billion wall instead" that is going to bad news for the GOP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top