What would be a reasonable compromise on this wall issue ?

@OggggO well politics is all about compromise... who doesnt see that shouldnt be politican

@NoSugar

@OggggO aybe instead of a blender how about finding out why the elephant wants them in a blender and adress that issue...

@NoSugar In this case the "kittens" are being scapegoated for numerous problems because they are an easily labeled "other" which makes them prime targets for branding by people with ill intentions.

@OggggO well people being scared of illegal immegrants is real.. the fear is real, the reasoning might not be but that fear has to be adressed and not put off as nonsense

@NoSugar https://twitter.com/JamesMartinSJ/status/1083182913477332993

@OggggO so the solution is to put everyone with a different opinion into a reeducation camp ? dont be scared anymore or else...

@NoSugar Where the absolute fuck did I say that?

@OggggO well what do you suggest with people that are afraid? you cant just get rid of them magically you have to deal with them

@NoSugar I'm not sure if you paid attention when Obama was POTUS or not, but the GOP killed the concept of "compromise" completely. It was well on the way under before that, but the Tea Party buried it with great fanfare and lots of backslapping.

No, compromise is not possible here, nor should it be sought.

@daisymay
I’m a liberal, and I completely agree with your assessment of how things started to REALLY go south during the Obama administration.

But failing to seek compromise means everyone has a “my way or no way” attitude, which we’ve been working with for several years now. And all that gets us is a big ol’ healing pile of “nothing gets done but at least I didn’t give in to those stupid bastards over there.”
I think @NoSugar is asking exactly the right question, with exactly the right boundaries.

If it’s about border security, as the right screams regularly (led by the POSIC), then find out what the folks who are tasked with keeping the border secure want, in all the various places they work (different stuff in different places), and offer some or all of the funding necessary to make that happen. Will some of that be a wall? Very probably. Will McConnell and his not-dying-fast-enough-old-white-men-cohort* claim some kind of political victory? Probably. But guess what - the border will be more secure, and federal workers will get paychecks.

I’m not suggesting you fit this, but if liberals insist on a political victory instead of taking care of business, then they’re just as bad as the republicans who are doing the same thing, IMO.

* For the record, I’m white, middle class, rich (though not wealthy), male, and 60 (almost) - I can talk about the old white bastards who need to leave government to more women and younger folk. :)

@Strictsinger You do not negotiate with terrorists. Fin.

@Strictsinger This isn't about a "political victory", it's about not doing something awful.

@daisymay
Okay, but be prepared for people to die. Because terrorists don’t really care about their hostages.
And if actually working with someone who isn’t ACTUALLY a REAL, BONAFIDE terrorist can get those 800,000 people paid, then not working with him makes us complicit.
I freaking HATE 45, as a nominal human being, and as a president. But while 45’s all sorts of bad, and failing to pay 800,000 people and causing them damage because he wants a wall is vile, but to date, we’re not clear that he’s actually willing to kill, which is what terrorists do.

@Strictsinger [quote]we’re not clear that he’s actually willing to kill[/quote]

I think it's quite clear.

Well, it’s clear that Hillary was willing to kill as well. @daisymay

Truth is, the Democrats have assumed for 2 years that the Republicans would have never supported this incompetent nut job of a president. So they have been disingenuous in their negotiations.

The Republican weasels are hiding behind this moron because they are getting everything they want.

Are Federal employees (and the economy) being held hostage?

Yes.

Is this terrorism?

No.

Is the president to blame?

Yes.

Are the Democrats to blame?

Yes.

Are the Republicans to blame?

Yes.

They all pretty much have an equal share of the blame pie, regardless of public opinion.

Do any of them have the moral character to do what’s right and pay people for what they have earned?

Who knows? I don’t have faith in any of them.

@JoeyFoxx [quote]They all pretty much have an equal share of the blame pie, regardless of public opinion.[/quote]

Nope. Only Republicans are grandstanding to keep the government closed.

@daisymay tell me why the problem solvers caucus exists and why members of the caucus are taking heat from their own parties.

You are terribly naive if you think this problem is made by Republicans alone.

Obamacare is an excellent example of how Democrats in recent history have used their influence to steamroll.

This is a problem created and owned equally by both parties.

Anyone who says otherwise is a nothing more than a shill

@JoeyFoxx [quote]Obamacare is an excellent example of how Democrats in recent history have used their influence to steamroll.[/quote]

This lie has been beaten into the ground, can somebody please find a new one that doesn't look like a bloody wreck?

@JoeyFoxx [quote]Anyone who says otherwise is a nothing more than a shill[/quote]

Fuck you, too!

@daisymay have a pleasant day

@daisymay
If it’s quite clear that 45 is willing to kill people, I reiterate my point. While you’re enjoying the high moral ground of, “We don’t negotiate with terrorists” dogma, recognize that your refusal to negotiate with dobeone who doesn’t care if he kills his hostages is exactly whats going to get them killed.
I’m sure some of them, and some of their families, will be damned proud that their fathers/mothers/sons/daughters died for a great cause, but for the majority that don’t, I hope you’ll be ready to stand in front of them and tell them how refusing to talk to the president was note important than their life.

@Strictsinger The point of not negotiating with terrorists is not "moral high ground", but because if hostage taking works once, it will work over and over again. It's depressing that these people are caught in the middle, but it's either end this without rewarding those who put them there, or see them, and more, back there every time Trump or someone like him who saw that it worked for him, feels like they aren't getting enough of their way. There are currently 800,000 hostages, but I guarantee that if we give Trump the wall in exchange for their paychecks, the final total will make 800,000 look small.