Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    24 Jan '19 18:01
    One individual (Trump) caused the government to go into power saving mode in order to keep part of an insane campaign promise and another individual (McConnell) prevents any vote (which most likely will succeed) to end the government shutdown in order to not appear contrary to a man popular in the state in which he will run in 2020.

    When two people hold this much power, how democratic can a country be. Tell me how the will of the people is served by two politicians serving their own interests while breaking the country.
  2. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    24 Jan '19 18:03
    YouTube

    Who shuts their country down for politics? Americans. They allowed this to happen and if they don't change the rules by which votes are held in the house and senate, it will continue to happen.
  3. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19370
    25 Jan '19 10:28
    @zahlanzi said
    One individual (Trump) caused the government to go into power saving mode in order to keep part of an insane campaign promise and another individual (McConnell) prevents any vote (which most likely will succeed) to end the government shutdown in order to not appear contrary to a man popular in the state in which he will run in 2020.

    When two people hold this much power, ...[text shortened]... l of the people is served by two politicians serving their own interests while breaking the country.
    It follows the laws of the land, though, and it appears to be the effort to fulfill the rally cry of the sitting President.

    IDK, bro.

    I think that there is a very legitimate claim to say that this is the effort to fulfill an aspect of democracy. Of course, you may not agree with this, and that is fine.

    It's your right.
  4. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    2415
    25 Jan '19 10:35
    @zahlanzi said
    One individual (Trump) caused the government to go into power saving mode in order to keep part of an insane campaign promise and another individual (McConnell) prevents any vote (which most likely will succeed) to end the government shutdown in order to not appear contrary to a man popular in the state in which he will run in 2020.

    When two people hold this much power, ...[text shortened]... l of the people is served by two politicians serving their own interests while breaking the country.
    It's all about checks and balances. Stay tuned; normal transmission will be restored, eventually.
  5. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    25 Jan '19 11:154 edits
    @zahlanzi said
    One individual (Trump) caused the government to go into power saving mode in order to keep part of an insane campaign promise and another individual (McConnell) prevents any vote (which most likely will succeed) to end the government shutdown in order to not appear contrary to a man popular in the state in which he will run in 2020.

    When two people hold this much power, ...[text shortened]... l of the people is served by two politicians serving their own interests while breaking the country.
    Hang in there sparky, don't go poo pooing the all powerful hand of the Executive that Progressives have worked so hard to create in defiance of the Constitution. Soon you will have your partisan hack in office to make heads roll as well and deprive half the other country of any representation. Soon you will be happy as a lark.

    I'm guessing Trump will use his "Progressive Executive magical powers" to fund a wall in the near future by declaring a state of emergency, which will then trigger the Dims to probably do the same with global warming issues. And when they do, you will be smiling ear to ear. Then you can pick up a Progressive club and just start swinging at anything that opposes you politically, all in memory of the great Progressive Teddy Roosevelt.

    It's all good.
  6. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14741
    27 Jan '19 01:18
    @zahlanzi said
    One individual (Trump) caused the government to go into power saving mode in order to keep part of an insane campaign promise and another individual (McConnell) prevents any vote (which most likely will succeed) to end the government shutdown in order to not appear contrary to a man popular in the state in which he will run in 2020.

    When two people hold this much power, ...[text shortened]... l of the people is served by two politicians serving their own interests while breaking the country.
    What do you mean? The democrats were all for it before they were all against it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

    https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/23/mick-mulvaney/fact-check-did-top-democrats-vote-border-wall-2006/

    This is just partisan posturing on the part of democrats. It has nothing to do with actual ideology. They used to be all for it.
  7. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    27 Jan '19 01:24
    @metal-brain said
    What do you mean? The democrats were all for it before they were all against it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

    https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/23/mick-mulvaney/fact-check-did-top-democrats-vote-border-wall-2006/

    This is just partisan posturing on the part of democrats. It has nothing to do with actual ideology. They used to be all for it.
    IF the Secure Fence Act of 2006 already built a wall as you claim, then Trump's proposal is redundant and unnecessary.
  8. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    65530
    27 Jan '19 07:38
    @zahlanzi said
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucNHDewFZKk

    Who shuts their country down for politics? Americans. They allowed this to happen and if they don't change the rules by which votes are held in the house and senate, it will continue to happen.
    Haha, 'shut the country down' zahloons cracked a funny, most people didn't notice anything different. What corporation can function with 800000 non essential people.
  9. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    27 Jan '19 11:14
    @metal-brain said
    What do you mean? The democrats were all for it before they were all against it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

    https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/23/mick-mulvaney/fact-check-did-top-democrats-vote-border-wall-2006/

    This is just partisan posturing on the part of democrats. It has nothing to do with actual ideology. They used to be all for it.
    In your metal brain there are any connections between how someone votes in the past and the topic i submitted for debate that 2 people in government can bring democracy to a crashing stop? Does a 2006 act have anything to do with trump taking 800000 government workers hostage (not to mention those affected indirectly)?

    Or did you search for an anecdote about democrats that has the word "wall" in it.


    Fyi everybody has the right to vote a different way whenever there is a vote. Not to mention there are new democrats now than in 2006 and they aren't a hive mind. Not to mention the link you posted said clearly the 2006 fence is nowhere near what Trump is proposing. What you posted is dumb on its own, not just completely irrelevant to this topic.
  10. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    149035
    27 Jan '19 11:52
    @wajoma said
    Haha, 'shut the country down' zahloons cracked a funny, most people didn't notice anything different. What corporation can function with 800000 non essential people.
    I was wondering why some who were working without pay, were not getting paid, and there were those taking vacations and travelling around the world *before they were denied* were getting paid.
  11. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14741
    27 Jan '19 15:44
    @no1marauder said
    IF the Secure Fence Act of 2006 already built a wall as you claim, then Trump's proposal is redundant and unnecessary.
    There was 50 billion allocated for the wall in that act. Only a few billion was used out of that. It was unfinished.
  12. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14741
    27 Jan '19 15:50
    @zahlanzi said
    In your metal brain there are any connections between how someone votes in the past and the topic i submitted for debate that 2 people in government can bring democracy to a crashing stop? Does a 2006 act have anything to do with trump taking 800000 government workers hostage (not to mention those affected indirectly)?

    Or did you search for an anecdote about democrats tha ...[text shortened]... rump is proposing. What you posted is dumb on its own, not just completely irrelevant to this topic.
    "Not to mention the link you posted said clearly the 2006 fence is nowhere near what Trump is proposing. What you posted is dumb on its own, not just completely irrelevant to this topic."

    Are you sure? That 2006 act allocated 50 billion dollars when passed. When did DJT propose more than that?
  13. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    27 Jan '19 16:16
    @metal-brain said
    There was 50 billion allocated for the wall in that act. Only a few billion was used out of that. It was unfinished.
    The Act did not allocate $50 billion for fencing and the project authorized by that law was completed. https://www.factcheck.org/2019/01/meme-misleads-on-bushs-border-fence/
  14. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14741
    28 Jan '19 02:402 edits
    @no1marauder said
    The Act did not allocate $50 billion for fencing and the project authorized by that law was completed. https://www.factcheck.org/2019/01/meme-misleads-on-bushs-border-fence/
    "Congress put aside $1.4 billion for the fence, but the whole cost, including maintenance, was pegged at $50 billion over 25 years, according to analyses at the time."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

    That was 13 years ago. We should have spent 26 billion on it by now unless you disagree with the estimates. Even if you do it does not justify zero funding.

    All the democrats have accomplished is giving DJT the excuse to fund the wall with emergency spending. I don't think it was a victory for Pelosi at all. Now she has to justify zero for the wall/fencing. Given Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton voted for the 2006 fence act how can democrats justify zero spending on the wall?

    What this will result in is consolidation of power to POTUS at the expense of weakening the power of congress. Pelosi is either a corrupt bitch helping to give Trump more power or she is extremely stupid!
  15. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    28 Jan '19 05:02
    @metal-brain said
    "Congress put aside $1.4 billion for the fence, but the whole cost, including maintenance, was pegged at $50 billion over 25 years, according to analyses at the time."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

    That was 13 years ago. We should have spent 26 billion on it by now unless you disagree with the estimates. Even if you do it does not justify ze ...[text shortened]... gress. Pelosi is either a corrupt bitch helping to give Trump more power or she is extremely stupid!
    From your article:

    The Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Pub.L. 109–367), also labelled H.R. 6061, is an Act of the United States Congress which authorized and partially funded the "possible" construction of 700 miles (1,125 km) of physical fence/barriers along the Mexican border.


    The border is approximate 1954 miles long. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/border-issues/2017/09/19/wall-how-long-us-mexico-border/676001001/

    So the Act in 2006 did not foresee what Trump consistently claimed he wanted i.e. a wall across virtually all of the border. He ridiculed the existing fencing on the border as completely inadequate. Here's what the Donald said on February 16, 2017:

    And we’re going to have a wall that works. We’re not going to have a wall like they have now, which is either nonexistent or a joke.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-press-conference/

    The Democrats didn't propose zero funding for the existing fencing; they passed bills providing $1.3 billion in FY 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/

    Trump declaring a national emergency just because Congress won't vote the way he wants would be unconstitutional. I'm confident it would be struck down by the courts; Harry Truman attempted to seize the steel mills during the Korean War because there was a strike and production of steel would have been disrupted during actual fighting but the SCOTUS ruled he had no power to do so. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/343us579
Back to Top