Democrats going to shutdown the government out of spite

[Hey Yo]

Shumer got his ass chewed out by fellow Dems back in March for chosing to stay open. Now he's gotta posture and ask for impossible money to provide free health care to all undocumented, illegal immigrants. That's just downright retarded to do that.

So Shumer's got till midnight tonight to decide if he wants to see the headline "DEMS SHUTDOWN GOVERMENT" tomorrow considering their approval numbers are already in the shitter.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Shutdowns are always the result of both parties being unable to reach a compromise. And FYI, Trump's approval numbers aren't that pretty right now either.

[beasted]

We currently have a Republican President, and majority Republican Supreme Court, Senate, House and Governors. Yet somehow the blame is still Democrats?

Makes sense. I think it's pretty awesome that those excellent Republican senators with exceptional business acumen and negotiation can't even convince 5 Democrats to agree.

[highwhey]

We currently have a Republican President, and majority Republican Supreme Court, Senate, House and Governors. Yet somehow the blame is still Democrats?

Makes sense. I think it's pretty awesome that those excellent Republican senators with exceptional business acumen and negotiation can't even convince 5 Democrats to agree.

they're running the country into the ground and will still find a way to blame democrats.

[Hey Yo]

We currently have a Republican President, and majority Republican Supreme Court, Senate, House and Governors. Yet somehow the blame is still Democrats?

Makes sense. I think it's pretty awesome that those excellent Republican senators with exceptional business acumen and negotiation can't even convince 5 Democrats to agree.

Why should Illegal immigrants be given free Healthcare?

[beasted]

Why should Illegal immigrants be given free Healthcare?

Why ask a random stranger on a message board and not one of the 53 capable senators why they are so ineffective at convincing just a handful of democrats of what you just said?

[1987_Lakers]

1 vote away from releasing the Epstein files and a shutdown happens. lol.

[Chick Stern]

Why should Illegal immigrants be given free Healthcare?

It has nothing to do with illegal immigrant healthcare.
A) a Supreme Court decision already gives them care via emergency rooms.
B) cuts to ACA subsidies will affect literally millions of middle-class Americans, mostly in rural Trump-lovin areas.
Combined with exploding fuel & grocery prices, tariff impacts, and the complete collapse of the grain export market, rural America is f#cked.

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61Yx+Eyt9EL._AC_SL1500_.jpg

[Axe]

Damn, the meltdown has begun.

[warriorfan]

Democrats are low iq with low impulse control and can’t think further than their last step behind. They actively hate America and the American people. Republicans in power probably do too but they at least have the common sense to not fully let their ass show.

[beasted]

Democrats are low iq with low impulse control and cant think further than their last step behind. They actively hate America and the American people. Republicans in power probably do too but they at least have the common sense to not fully let their ass show.

Your mindset is the entire problem with this country summarized.

Someone knows something is bad, but they go along with it anyway as the status quo. This insane logic trap exists in politics, food choices, relationships, etc.

Anyway, the fault of the government shutdown is squarely on Republicans. We have professional litigators, former lawyers, business leaders skilled in negotiating, people who graduated from Ivy League schools, and people with no moral code who regularly break the law for under-the-table and backdoor deals. The fact that you didn't have a collection of these Republicans figure out a way to sway a handful of Democrats is a bitter pill of failure that only they need to swallow and own.

They didn't care enough about the American people to make sure there would not be a shutdown. Congress and the president did whatever was needed to save TikTok, but couldn't ensure people can have access to meaningful services and jobs.

[Hey Yo]

Why ask a random stranger on a message board and not one of the 53 capable senators why they are so ineffective at convincing just a handful of democrats of what you just said?

Your party's in a free fall, chico. The Shumer shutdown is doing you no favors. The far left got him on a leash after the backlash he received in March. He's afraid All Out Crazy is gonna take his spot.

[beasted]

Your party's in a free fall, chico. The Shumer shutdown is doing you no favors. The far left got him on a leash after the backlash he received in March. He's afraid All Out Crazy is gonna take his spot.

There's an Independent party? When are the primaries?

I'm the biggest advocate you'll ever find of dissolving the party system entirely.

[Hey Yo]

Ahhhhhh... the old independent trick where you can shit on whichever side and then say "I'm an independent, I don't care about __________"

Nobody's fooled.

[beasted]

Ahhhhhh... the old independent trick where you can shit on whichever side and then say "I'm an independent, I don't care about __________"

Nobody's fooled.

I would expect a simple person to only see things in analog. Either Democrat or Republican. 0 or 1. Just like a robot. Stay alseep in the matrix, my guy.

[rmt]

Are you ok with giving ACA subsidies with no income limits? The crazy COVID ACA government spending needs to stop. The Democrats are disingenuous in saying that these emergency subsidies are healthcare being cut when they expire at year's end.

Individual coverage exchange plans created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have a glaring problem: nearly 12 million enrollees, or 35 percent of all exchange enrollees in 2024, do not use their benefits at all.*

Are you ok with 12 million enrollees who don't need benefits getting subsidies on the back of taxpayers and driving up health care costs?

* https://paragoninstitute.org/private-health/ghostbusting-aca-fraud-millions-who-dont-use-their-health-insurance-expose-abuse-in-the-program/

[highwhey]

LOL pretending to care about money all of a sudden, not like the turd president hasn't been spending like crazy on ICE, his new airplane and the white house upgrades all because of his ego.

and let's not even discuss the tremendous costs of elon's firings and then re-hiring :facepalm

[beasted]

Are you ok with giving ACA subsidies with no income limits? The crazy COVID ACA government spending needs to stop. The Democrats are disingenuous in saying that these emergency subsidies are healthcare being cut when they expire at year's end.

Individual coverage exchange plans created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have a glaring problem: nearly 12 million enrollees, or 35 percent of all exchange enrollees in 2024, do not use their benefits at all.*

Are you ok with 12 million enrollees who don't need benefits getting subsidies on the back of taxpayers and driving up health care costs?

* https://paragoninstitute.org/private-health/ghostbusting-aca-fraud-millions-who-dont-use-their-health-insurance-expose-abuse-in-the-program/

I'll be honest, I don't know enough of about these ACA extensions to answer that. But, I think I have what I believe is a VERY FAIR and PRACTICAL response question:

As of October 1, 2025, DOGE claims to have saved the country $206B. According to Trump, his tariffs are projected to make "trillions" of dollars for the US government. Lastly, according to Trump, the GOP Senate and GOP House, the Big Beautiful Bill will significantly cut government costs and stimulate the economy. With these supposed wins ALREADY in place, do you think it is JUSTIFIED to shut the government down over these expenses? Will allowing these concessions TOTALLY UNDO the other savings? In the simplest version of my question: are these costs expected to cost the government multiples of trillions?

[Lakers Legend#32]

Middle School Civics classes teaches us that Congress controls the purse strings. Republicans control both branches of congress congress, as well as the White House.

If they can't get a budget through it reflects on their poor leadership.

When I said you MAGAS were poorly educated, I did not think it applied to your middle school education.

[ShawkFactory]

Are you ok with giving ACA subsidies with no income limits? The crazy COVID ACA government spending needs to stop. The Democrats are disingenuous in saying that these emergency subsidies are healthcare being cut when they expire at year's end.

Individual coverage exchange plans created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have a glaring problem: nearly 12 million enrollees, or 35 percent of all exchange enrollees in 2024, do not use their benefits at all.*

Are you ok with 12 million enrollees who don't need benefits getting subsidies on the back of taxpayers and driving up health care costs?

* https://paragoninstitute.org/private-health/ghostbusting-aca-fraud-millions-who-dont-use-their-health-insurance-expose-abuse-in-the-program/

Sure, this is an issue. But the problems extends off of the other arm because how to you qualify who needs or doesn't need benefits?

If one doesn't receive any healthcare delivery the previous year, should they only be eligible to receive affordable care at the time of car accident? Or are they, and/or their providers, just screwed?

Stripping this will also open up a can of worms as well. If we're essentially providing free healthcare for those that can't afford it then healthcare costs for the rest of us will sky-rocket too.

[rmt]

I'll be honest, I don't know enough of about these ACA extensions to answer that. But, I think I have what I believe is a VERY FAIR and PRACTICAL response question:

As of October 1, 2025, DOGE claims to have saved the country $206B. According to Trump, his tariffs are projected to make "trillions" of dollars for the US government. Lastly, according to Trump, the GOP Senate and GOP House, the Big Beautiful Bill will significantly cut government costs and stimulate the economy. With these supposed wins ALREADY in place, do you think it is JUSTIFIED to shut the government down over these expenses? Will allowing these concessions TOTALLY UNDO the other savings? In the simplest version of my question: are these costs expected to cost the government multiples of trillions?

Well, maybe you should find out about WHY these ACA extensions were instituted (and phased out at the end of this year) to decide if they should be continued.

IMHO, all money from tariffs, government cost cuts and gains from stimulating the economy - should go to reducing our debt. I don't happen to take everything that Trump exaggerates as true. Why should anything go toward continuing something that was meant to be TEMPORARY because of COVID?

Our taxpayer dollars should not go toward paying for ACA subsidies for people with NO regard to income limits. This is exactly how government spending explodes. They continue a once-in-a-lifetime "help"/emergency and keep expanding forever.

AI Overview
ACA Income Thresholds 2025: Subsidies Explained
In 2014, the ACA's premium tax credits, or subsidies, were available to U.S. citizens and legal residents with household incomes between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL), who did not have access to other affordable coverage. The exact income amounts varied by household size, with a single person's income falling between approximately $11,500 and $46,000, and a family of four's between roughly $23,500 and $94,000. The subsidy amount was on a sliding scale, with people paying a maximum percentage of their income for a benchmark health plan, and the government covering the rest

[Bill Gates]

POTUS: Republican
SCOTUS: Republican
House: Republican
Senate: Republican
Congress: Republican
All of the Government: Republican


"Democrats are shutting the Government down"

[beasted]

Well, maybe you should find out about WHY these ACA extensions were instituted (and phased out at the end of this year) to decide if they should be continued.

IMHO, all money from tariffs, government cost cuts and gains from stimulating the economy - should go to reducing our debt. I don't happen to take everything that Trump exaggerates as true. Why should anything go toward continuing something that was meant to be TEMPORARY because of COVID?

Our taxpayer dollars should not go toward paying for ACA subsidies for people with NO regard to income limits. This is exactly how government spending explodes. They continue a once-in-a-lifetime "help"/emergency and keep expanding forever.

AI Overview
ACA Income Thresholds 2025: Subsidies Explained
In 2014, the ACA's premium tax credits, or subsidies, were available to U.S. citizens and legal residents with household incomes between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL), who did not have access to other affordable coverage. The exact income amounts varied by household size, with a single person's income falling between approximately $11,500 and $46,000, and a family of four's between roughly $23,500 and $94,000. The subsidy amount was on a sliding scale, with people paying a maximum percentage of their income for a benchmark health plan, and the government covering the rest

How can politicians not believe people will lose healthcare with this change

I pay a lot of money for all types of insurance which I never file a claim for. Not using it doesn't mean I shouldn't have it.

All of my life I had insurance coverage. But, one single time I had just started a new job that had a 90-day waiting period, and I decided to chance it. That one 3 month span without insurance is when I fell and broke my arm costing me thousands out of pocket. Lucky for me I am financially capable of paying that, but I can imagine someone within percentages of the FPL might be bankrupted and/or credit ruined for years by that same accident. Is that what we want for fellow Americans?

If this is only temporary, it seems like even more reason for Republicans to negotiate and get a deal done. Again, they only have a handful to convince.

[highwhey]

POTUS: Republican
SCOTUS: Republican
House: Republican
Senate: Republican
Congress: Republican
All of the Government: Republican


"Democrats are shutting the Government down"

:oldlol:

[beasted]

If I understand the dispute here, this is about Republicans demanding that someone making between $11k and $46k buy their own insurance?

I could not imagine trying to make it in this life on $46k. I could never think "Look at those people mooching off my tax dollars so they can see a doctor".

My employer-covered insurance would be almost 10% of that person's salary.

[rmt]

How can politicians not believe people will lose healthcare with this change

I pay a lot of money for all types of insurance which I never file a claim for. Not using it doesn't mean I shouldn't have it.

All of my life I had insurance coverage. But, one single time I had just started a new job that had a 90-day waiting period, and I decided to chance it. That one 3 month span without insurance is when I fell and broke my arm costing me thousands out of pocket. Lucky for me I am financially capable of paying that, but I can imagine someone within percentages of the FPL might be bankrupted and/or credit ruined for years by that same accident. Is that what we want for fellow Americans?


If this is only temporary, it seems like even more reason for Republicans to negotiate and get a deal done. Again, they only have a handful to convince.

There is no change. If things stay as is (meaning passing a clean, continuing resolution), the extended subsidies WILL expire at the end of the year (as they were originally intended to) - they were brought into existence because of the once-in-a-lifetime event (COVID).

Why not just say one is for universal healthcare? Or that we shouldn't have ANY insurance - that SOMEONE (meaning the taxpayer) will be responsible/pay up should any disaster happen? Can we afford that? That's UTOPIA.

[rmt]

If I understand the dispute here, this is about Republicans demanding that someone making between $11k and $46k buy their own insurance?

I could not imagine trying to make it in this life on $46k. I could never think "Look at those people mooching off my tax dollars so they can see a doctor".

My employer-covered insurance would be almost 10% of that person's salary.

No, you don't understand the dispute here - someone who makes between $11K and $46K is exactly who the original ACA subsidies were meant for - not someone with unlimited income.

[rmt]

IMO, the republicans will get that handful to vote for continuing resolution. The longer this shutdown goes on, the more government workers (mostly democrats) will get ansty and pressure Democrats and the more reason Trump has to say - see we really don't need so many government workers and fire/lay them off.

[beasted]

There is no change. If things stay as is (meaning passing a clean, continuing resolution), the extended subsidies WILL expire at the end of the year (as they were originally intended to) - they were brought into existence because of the once-in-a-lifetime event (COVID).

Why not just say one is for universal healthcare? Or that we shouldn't have ANY insurance - that SOMEONE (meaning the taxpayer) will be responsible/pay up should any disaster happen? Can we afford that? That's UTOPIA.

How is it universal healthcare when the total ACA enrollees are 24 million of our 340 million population? Have we solved the healthcare affordability problem or do you think that's not an important consideration to resolve first?

For 15 years Trump has claimed he has a plan.

https://youtube.com/shorts/o_x8DVhmR9o?si=oHC4ZEJrtGb_w6GT

I pay almost $4k a year ($328 per month) in health insurance, which would murder someone making between $12k and $46k.

Do you believe we should get rid of Medicare and Medicaid too since government-sponsored healthcare costs money?

[beasted]

No, you don't understand the dispute here - someone who makes between $11K and $46K is exactly who the original ACA subsidies were meant for - not someone with unlimited income.

This makes zero sense since there is an income limit to qualify for health insurance marketplace plans subsidies. I don't understand anything of what you've tried explaining

[rmt]

How is it universal healthcare when the total ACA enrollees are 24 million of our 340 million population? Have we solved the healthcare affordability problem or do you think that's not an important consideration to resolve first?

For 15 years Trump has claimed he has a plan.

https://youtube.com/shorts/o_x8DVhmR9o?si=oHC4ZEJrtGb_w6GT

I pay almost $4k a year ($328 per month) in health insurance, which would murder someone making between $12k and $46k.

Do you believe we should get rid of Medicare and Medicaid too since government-sponsored healthcare costs money?

I did not say that ACA is universal health care. My comment on universal health care was in reference to your 3 month uncovered insurance period and ShawkFactory's comment about how do you qualify who needs or doesn't need benefits.

I believe that Medicare age should be raised for younger people (as we are all living longer) in order to try to save/preserve the program. I also believe that Medicaid should be for people who it was originally created for - children, pregnant women, disabled and elderly with income limits - not young, single, able-bodied men.

I think Social Security (and Medicare funds) should be invested in low-cost S&P 500 index funds (kinda like Australia's retirement system and Canada Pension Plan do) instead of Treasury securities - we would probably have a surplus instead of the upcoming deficit. Also, the cap on income for SS should be lifted.

[rmt]

This makes zero sense since there is an income limit to qualify for health insurance marketplace plans subsidies. I don't understand anything of what you've tried explaining

You are mistaken - there is NO income limit to qualify for aca subsidies - google "covid aca subsidies":

Enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, often referred to as "COVID-era subsidies," were initially established by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to mitigate the economic impact of the pandemic on health insurance affordability.

These temporary measures significantly expanded financial assistance for ACA Marketplace plans by increasing subsidy amounts and eliminating the income cap for eligibility, allowing individuals earning above 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL) to qualify for premium tax credits.

The enhancements were later extended through the end of 2025 by the Inflation Reduction Act.

As a result of these expanded subsidies, ACA Marketplace enrollment nearly doubled, rising from about 12 million in 2021 to a record 24.2 million in 2025.
In 2024, over 21 million people enrolled in ACA plans, with 91% receiving substantial subsidies that reduced their average monthly premium from $477 to just $124.
For individuals earning up to 150% of the FPL, health insurance became available at $0 out-of-pocket cost.

These enhanced subsidies are set to expire on December 31, 2025, unless Congress acts to extend them

[Hey Yo]

Is AOC the one who's directing the shutdown? Don't ask Pelosi

REPORTER: There was a thought from the Republicans that AOC is directing this, and she said that senators are welcome to go to her office directly. Is she driving that?

PELOSI: Why are you saying such a ridiculous thing?

https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/why-are-you-saying-such-a-ridiculous-thing-nancy-pelosi-rebukes-reporter-asking-if-gop-should-negotiate-with-aoc/.

https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1973410351103300028?s=19

:oldlol:

[rmt]

I did not say that ACA is universal health care. My comment on universal health care was in reference to your 3 month uncovered insurance period and ShawkFactory's comment about how do you qualify who needs or doesn't need benefits.

I believe that Medicare age should be raised for younger people (as we are all living longer) in order to try to save/preserve the program. I also believe that Medicaid should be for people who it was originally created for - children, pregnant women, disabled and elderly with income limits - not young, single, able-bodied men.

I think Social Security (and Medicare funds) should be invested in low-cost S&P 500 index funds (kinda like Australia's retirement system and Canada Pension Plan do) instead of Treasury securities - we would probably have a surplus instead of the upcoming deficit. Also, the cap on income for SS should be lifted.

And raise the age for SS.

[BurningHammer]

Is AOC the one who's directing the shutdown? Don't ask Pelosi

REPORTER: There was a thought from the Republicans that AOC is directing this, and she said that senators are welcome to go to her office directly. Is she driving that?

PELOSI: Why are you saying such a ridiculous thing?

https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/why-are-you-saying-such-a-ridiculous-thing-nancy-pelosi-rebukes-reporter-asking-if-gop-should-negotiate-with-aoc/.

https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1973410351103300028?s=19

:oldlol:

I thought Obama did it. :rolleyes: :oldlol:

[BurningHammer]

https://i.redd.it/f2truz1dnpsf1.jpeg

This while GOP is blaming the "radical left" on government websites. :oldlol:

[ShawkFactory]

https://i.redd.it/f2truz1dnpsf1.jpeg

This while GOP is blaming the "radical left" on government websites. :oldlol:

My guess is the blame on the radical left is coming from the HC policies they are coming to the table with.

But even still...silly to blame democrats for the shutdown. That's like a dude hitting his wife and saying she made him.

[BurningHammer]

https://i.redd.it/bpzzs0vagpsf1.png

:roll::roll::roll:

[Hey Yo]

My guess is the blame on the radical left is coming from the HC policies they are coming to the table with.

But even still...silly to blame democrats for the shutdown. That's like a dude hitting his wife and saying she made him.

Republicans are solely to blame? Why do you say that?

[ShawkFactory]

Republicans are solely to blame? Why do you say that?

Not solely, I suppose.

But given that they own all 3 branches at the moment it seems like there is definitely something that could have been done here. And it certainly isn't being shut down by the Democrats as your OP suggests.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Republicans are solely to blame? Why do you say that?
Same reason you blamed the Democrats in the first post.

[rmt]

Not solely, I suppose.

But given that they own all 3 branches at the moment it seems like there is definitely something that could have been done here. And it certainly isn't being shut down by the Democrats as your OP suggests.

60 votes are needed in the Senate - there aren't 60 Republicans. Dems are the ones who want changes - republicans want a clean, continuing resolution to have more time to discuss/debate/negotiate (without the government being shut down).

[Hey Yo]

Not solely, I suppose.

But given that they own all 3 branches at the moment it seems like there is definitely something that could have been done here. And it certainly isn't being shut down by the Democrats as your OP suggests.

When you ask for extremely unreasonable things... then it's hard to agree

[Hey Yo]

Same reason you blamed the Democrats in the first post.

See my post above

[Hey Yo]

Two Democratic senators and one independent who caucuses with them crossed party lines to support the G.O.P. plan to keep government funding flowing.

In votes just hours before the shutdown and again on Wednesday after it had begun, Senators Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, both Democrats, and Angus King, the Maine independent who caucuses with them, were the only members of the minority to vote for a simple, roughly seven-week funding extension sought by Republicans.

In doing so, they broke with Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, who has pressed his party to hold the line against the G.O.P. spending plan until Republicans and President Trump negotiate with Democrats on a compromise that includes health care concessions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/us/politics/democrats-shutdown-vote.html

[Real Men Wear Green]

See my post above
You're too far gone to realize it but one side wanting money spent one way and another side having a different opinion is basically the reason that there are different political parties. A representative democracy has some kind of negotiation that leads to whatever the budget ends up being. You think the democrats should just be doing whatever Trump tells them to do but everyone doesn't worship your pedo overlord.

[Bill Gates]

"Make America Great Again" :facepalm

[j3lademaster]

We literally had 2 pages here arguing if we should get rid of the enhanced ACA subsidies, because “we can’t afford it” when we’re giving the wealthiest in the country $1trillion in tax cuts. We’re willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives for this. Bravo, people, and I though I was unempathetic.

[SouBeachTalents]

We literally had 2 pages here arguing if we should get rid of the enhanced ACA subsidies, because “we can’t afford it” when we’re giving the wealthiest in the country $1trillion in tax cuts. We’re willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives for this. Bravo, people, and I though I was unempathetic.
They're job creators.

[Hey Yo]

You're too far gone to realize it but one side wanting money spent one way and another side having a different opinion is basically the reason that there are different political parties. A representative democracy has some kind of negotiation that leads to whatever the budget ends up being. You think the democrats should just be doing whatever Trump tells them to do but everyone doesn't worship your pedo overlord.

Last time.... you brought up Trump and his 34 felony conviction but couldn't tell me what the date was of his sentencing. Now you say he's a pedo so maybe you could tell me this time the date of sentencing and how many years he's facing. Think ya could tell us now, chico?

You say he's a Pedo but have no problem living in a sanctuary city that defends undocumented illegal pedos, rapists, murders. You think crime is fine and don't give a shit about the U.S. laws or the taxpayers. It's you brah who's too far gone. Your priorities are completely fugged up due to TDS.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Your brain appears to actively reject facts. Trump was convicted of felonies. This makes him a felon. You argue with reality which is why you are easily disregarded.

[highwhey]

Working on a DoD project, luckily the project had funds already allocated long before we stepped foot on it but i can't imagine being a contractor for the federal government at this point and getting pressured into starting work with the shutdown being in play. I wouldn't lift a finger until the feds get their shit together, bills come rain or shine, or in this instance, government shutdown.

[Hey Yo]

Your brain appears to actively reject facts. Trump was convicted of felonies. This makes him a felon. You argue with reality which is why you are easily disregarded.

You're siding with thousands of undocumented illegal felons... tell me again how you hate felons but stick up for them constantly while talking out the other side of your ass.

[Real Men Wear Green]

You're siding with thousands of undocumented illegal felons... tell me again how you hate felons but stick up for them constantly while talking out the other side of your ass.
The insane rants don't help.

[Patrick Chewing]

Democrats hate America

[highwhey]

Democrats hate America

i know far more democrats defending the constitution than republicans, and i know a lot more republicans in person.

[Patrick Chewing]

i know far more democrats defending the constitution than republicans, and i know a lot more republicans in person.

Good luck trying to convince people of that.

[highwhey]

Good luck trying to convince people of that.

i don't need to convince anyone, it's 100% true. the current republicans are too busy clapping for trump while he tramples on the constitution. our forefathers would find his actions repulsive, the very anthesis of what the founding fathers were.

[Yes or No]

our forefathers

What happened to 'viva mexico'?

[Hey Yo]

Schumer should read his own words from 2013.

On the first day of the 2013 government shutdown, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, had a message for Republicans who refused to fund the government unless Congress defunded Obamacare: Hostage-taking would not work.

"As we said a thousand times, we are happy to discuss how to fund the government, but not with a gun to our heads," Schumer said on the Senate floor.

"You are not going to get us to give in to extortion," he continued. "You are not going to take, as hostage, millions of innocent Americans and succeed in getting us to do something you want, and we don't, and they don't.

Twelve years later, Schumer and Democrats, now in the minority, are staring down another government shutdown -- but one that might be of their own making.

In the Senate, Democrats are withholding support for a measure to keep the government funded at current levels unless Republicans extend subsidies that help some Americans pay for health care through the Affordable Care Act, which are set to expire at year's end, among other demands.

"Under a shutdown, the Trump administration would have wide-ranging authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel nonessential, furloughing staff members with no promise they would ever be rehired," Schumer wrote in the New York Times, explaining his vote.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/schumer-democrats-find-new-role-shutdown-looms-analysis/story?id=126038340

[bladefd]

Republicans - Lets significantly slash medicaid and other social programs to get MASSIVE taxcuts for the rich through and 100+ billion for ICE, gets rid of green energy investments

Democrats - Don't slash medicaid, and we will let the budget through if you negotiate that

Republicans - FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. LOOK AT OUR DEFICIT AND DEBT. WE WILL NOT GIVE MEDICAID FUND. (completely forgot about the historic taxcuts they passed). NO NEGOTIATION.

Democrats - Give us Medicaid funds or we won't give you everything you want if we get nothing

Republicans - SEE?? DEMOCRATS SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT. WE WILL START FIRING PEOPLE IF YOU DON'T GIVE US EVERYTHING WE WANT

[highwhey]

Republicans - Lets significantly slash medicaid and other social programs to get MASSIVE taxcuts for the rich through

Democrats - Don't slash medicaid, and we will let the budget through if you negotiate that

Republicans - FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. WE WILL NOT GIVE MEDICAID FUND. (completely forgot about the historic taxcuts they passed). NO NEGOTIATION.

Democrats - Give us Medicaid funds or we won't give you everything you want if we get nothing

Republicans - SEE?? DEMOCRATS SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT.

don't forget their version of fiscal responsibility is giving argentina $20 billion dollars while they bend over American farmers over a barrel and sodomize them.

[bladefd]

Q2 2025: top 10% gained $5T in wealth, bottom 50% gained $150 billion
Top 0.1% wealth has doubled since 2020 from $12.2T to $23.3T with stocks accounting for all of that growth
Top 1% own 50% of all individually held corporate equities and mutual fund shares; top 10% own 87%

Why do the top 1% need historic taxcuts?? I'm baffled. They are already gaining SIGNIFICANT wealth and still getting historic taxcuts. While cutting social programs for the middle-class and the poor. Even with those cuts, the taxcuts STILL add a few trillion to the debt. Can anyone justify that?

[Chick Stern]

When you ask for extremely unreasonable things... then it's hard to agree

WHAT “extremely unreasonable things”?

[BurningHammer]

WHAT “extremely unreasonable things”?

The made-up "healthcare for illegal immigrants" thing.

[rmt]

None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.

Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.

[rmt]

None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.

Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.

Crickets. Are you ALL ok with $12 million unused policies (NO claims in 2024) subsidized by taxpayers? Some states report more subsidized enrollees than census data shows could exist - you all ok with that?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK3LSyQe2vc

[Chick Stern]

None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.

Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.

You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.

You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Trump is shutting down the government because congress now has the votes to release the Epstein Files.

[rmt]

You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.

You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.

You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.

You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.

I am assuming that you are getting your overwhelming evidence from countries like Sweden, Norway? There are several things in contrast here the US. Their education is free** - they don't pay for medical school. Are you going to tell all the US medical schools NOT to charge for med school. Good luck with that.

The average salary of a doctor in Sweden is about $125k - in the US, it's much higher. Are we going to adjust DOWNWARD all physicians' salary to fit your cheaper per capita health care costs? And if a doctor has to train 4 years undergrad, 4 years medical school, 3-7 years of residency with hundreds of thousands in school loans, who is going to want to be paid $125k in salary - NO ONE. And even if you could get some fools to agree, what? will we adjust down the salary of accountants, lawyers, engineers to match? Ludicrous.

The US is a litigious society - our doctors (in particular), healthcare providers, hospitals must protect themselves against lawsuits which costs money - this malpractice/liability insurance is expensive. They are in many cases (over) trained - OT, PT, speech therapist must have doctorates. Are you going to be able to pass laws so that people cannot sue health care providers (as I assume it is in Sweden/Norway)? Good luck with that.

Pharma spends billions in research which they try to recoup before whatever patent sunsets (and becomes a generic). The rest of the world copies much of what the US discovers and charges pennies on the dollar. Are you going to prevent Pharma from charging so much? What do you think will happen to drug research in the US? It will dry up - because there is no incentive to spend billions if you can't recoup them. Then what, we just don't have any more cancer, alzheimer's, etc. research?

You might not like the society that we live in but reality is that this is the way it is - good luck taking on educational, medical, legal, pharma to change the system

**Chrome: How much does it cost for EEA education of doctor in Sweden

AI Overview
Medical education is free of charge in Sweden for EU/EEA citizens and does not require tuition fees. This means that if you are a citizen of a country within the European Union or European Economic Area, you will not have to pay any tuition for your medical studies at Swedish universities.
Key Points:
EU/EEA Citizens Pay No Tuition: Citizens of EU/EEA countries, along with citizens of Switzerland, are exempt from tuition fees for higher education in Sweden, including medical school

[rmt]

You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.

You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.

You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.

You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.

I am assuming that you are getting your overwhelming evidence from countries like Sweden, Norway? There are several things in contrast here the US. Their education is free** - they don't pay for medical school. Are you going to tell all the US medical schools NOT to charge for med school. Good luck with that.

The average salary of a doctor in Sweden is about $125k - in the US, it's much higher. Are we going to adjust DOWNWARD all physicians' salary to fit your cheaper per capita health care costs? And if a doctor has to train 4 years undergrad, 4 years medical school, 3-7 years of residency with hundreds of thousands in school loans, who is going to want to be paid $125k in salary - NO ONE. And even if you could get some fools to agree, what? will we adjust down the salary of accountants, lawyers, engineers to match? Ludicrous.

The US is a litigious society - our doctors (in particular), healthcare providers, hospitals must protect themselves against lawsuits which costs money - this malpractice/liability insurance is expensive. They are in many cases (over) trained - OT, PT, speech therapist must have doctorates. Are you going to be able to pass laws so that people cannot sue health care providers (as I assume it is in Sweden/Norway)? Good luck with that.

Pharma spends billions in research which they try to recoup before whatever patent sunsets (and becomes a generic). The rest of the world copies much of what the US discovers and charges pennies on the dollar. Are you going to prevent Pharma from charging so much? What do you think will happen to drug research in the US? It will dry up - because there is no incentive to spend billions if you can't recoup them. Then what, we just don't have any more cancer, alzheimer's, etc. research?

You might not like the society that we live in but reality is that this is the way it is - good luck taking on educational, medical, legal, pharma to change the system

**Chrome: How much does it cost for EEA education of doctor in Sweden

AI Overview
Medical education is free of charge in Sweden for EU/EEA citizens and does not require tuition fees. This means that if you are a citizen of a country within the European Union or European Economic Area, you will not have to pay any tuition for your medical studies at Swedish universities.
Key Points:
EU/EEA Citizens Pay No Tuition: Citizens of EU/EEA countries, along with citizens of Switzerland, are exempt from tuition fees for higher education in Sweden, including medical school

[bladefd]

None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.

Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.

How can you justify the historic taxcuts as the premise for that? Drop the historic taxcuts, and you now have a point.

I noticed MAGA has not addressed the taxcuts, so lets put you on record. Do you support historic taxcuts for the rich adding 3 trillion to the debt even AFTER healthcare insurance/other social cuts including for green energy? How about 150 billion for ICE or a trillion dollars for the military?

[Hey Yo]

More money for ICE wouldn't be needed if Biden didn't open up the border to millions of undocumented illegals. The more deported the better. It's not rocket science.

[rmt]

How can you justify the historic taxcuts as the premise for that? Drop the historic taxcuts, and you now have a point.

I noticed MAGA has not addressed the taxcuts, so lets put you on record. Do you support historic taxcuts for the rich adding 3 trillion to the debt even AFTER healthcare insurance/other social cuts including for green energy? How about 150 billion for ICE or a trillion dollars for the military?

I have stated repeatedly that I do not support deficits and every dollar saved from DOGE cuts, tariffs, etc. should go toward reducing our debt. The tax cuts have passed - they are not the subject of this government shutdown. If you want to decide what to spend money on, win elections.

I support deporting illegal aliens - they are not supposed to be here. A major part of why Trump won is because Biden opened up the border to "asylum seekers" when everyone knows the majority of them have no such claim.

[ShawkFactory]

None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.

Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.

Of course not. But you need to consider the repercussions of these things for the providers too.

While the barrier of entry is certainly an issue and should be addressed on an individual standpoint, hospitals are being affected by this as much as anyone. Remember that they also have these subsidies that are now being scrutinized heavily.

Most of these are non-profit systems as well. The thought processes with all of them is how to innovate and improve the patient experience.

I know because I work with them every day. Doesn't matter if you're a doctor, nurse, Cloud engineer, help desk associate, supply chain VP. When the rug is pulled out from you when truly positive actions are being taken? Not the best thing.

That's not to say that a program should be abused but many don't know what it takes to run a healthcare system..and money is important to have it be optimal.

[BurningHammer]

More money for ICE wouldn't be needed if Biden didn't open up the border to millions of undocumented illegals. The more deported the better. It's not rocket science.

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/biden-immigration-program-misrepresented-online-2024-07-03/

[Real Men Wear Green]

Jeffries challenged Johnson toa debate over the shutdown. He declined. Should he have accepted?

[Off the Court]

Why does the Trump admin hate good health so much?

[Real Men Wear Green]

Why does the Trump admin hate good health so much?Trump and the Republicans in general hate anything that Obama did. In theory it also helps with spending but with the enormous deficit spending going on it's funny how they only remember that we have a deficit problem when the spending is on something that people really need.

[Off the Court]

https://x.com/ReallyAmerican1/status/1975684711180612090


MTG Blasting Republicans :roll:

[bladefd]

I have stated repeatedly that I do not support deficits and every dollar saved from DOGE cuts, tariffs, etc. should go toward reducing our debt. The tax cuts have passed - they are not the subject of this government shutdown. If you want to decide what to spend money on, win elections.

I support deporting illegal aliens - they are not supposed to be here. A major part of why Trump won is because Biden opened up the border to "asylum seekers" when everyone knows the majority of them have no such claim.

You don't support deficit but have yet to say whether you support the historic taxcuts for the rich or not.

The reason for these social cuts is due in significant part to paying for the taxcuts. The way to balance the deficit is by cutting the excess AND not slashing the revenue. By cutting taxes, that lowers the revenue, so the cuts have to be even greater to balance the books. And even with the cuts, it won't make up for the revenue lost from taxcuts.

And it primarily impacts the poor and middle-class here. How can you justify that?

[BurningHammer]

https://x.com/ReallyAmerican1/status/1975684711180612090


MTG Blasting Republicans :roll:

She is in it for herself, getting ready for the next POTUS JD Vance.

[Patrick Chewing]

Why does the Trump admin hate good health so much?

Obama: "You'll get to keep your doctor"

[highwhey]

Obama: "You'll get to keep your doctor"

i would assume that's highly beneficial for you since not too many doctors specialize in treating someone that weighs 400 POUNDS

[Chick Stern]

Obama: "You'll get to keep your doctor"

Trump: “They’re eating the dogs!”

[Lakers Legend#32]

Obama: "You'll get to keep your doctor"


Trump: " I have ended seven wars."

[bladefd]

Even MAGA supports keeping the healthcare tax credits that Republicans want to dump. The Republican party leaders and Trump's bootlickers like rmt are so out of touch with reality & their own party. I can't wait for the blue wave in the midterms and 2028 with historic turnouts that will blanket the elections in blue. Republicans will turn on Trump so fast — "I never even knew Trump." "Who is Trump? I never heard of him" come post-2028.

https://i.ibb.co/zHxkQn7q/bafkreickhiremkuuyl4ypibjkc6i4lhamf5svywu5mca33qou noqo5fn6q.jpg

[BurningHammer]

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/news/cdc-rfk-jr-shutdown-layoffs-goal-rcna237035

Luckily, the employees are not fired yet. But yeah, Americans, at least, are f*cked.

[ZenMaster]

Even MAGA supports keeping the healthcare tax credits that Republicans want to dump. The Republican party leaders and Trump's bootlickers like rmt are so out of touch with reality & their own party. I can't wait for the blue wave in the midterms and 2028 with historic turnouts that will blanket the elections in blue. Republicans will turn on Trump so fast — "I never even knew Trump." "Who is Trump? I never heard of him" come post-2028.


You sound like TheAlwaysWrongMan where you don't have any wins in the present and is instead left with fantasizing about the future, trying to get your win ahead of time. Remember how not too long ago you were so sure that Trump would go to jail and definitely never become President again?
The left is going to have a historic win in just 3 years while your party is in demise is quite unrealistic when the border isn't opening again for new voters and so many of the ones you've let in over the last years will have been deported by ICE instead of having received amnesty for crossing the border illegally and become US citizens.

[Hey Yo]

Even MAGA supports keeping the healthcare tax credits that Republicans want to dump. The Republican party leaders and Trump's bootlickers are so out of touch with reality & their own party. I can't wait for the blue wave in the midterms and 2028 with historic turnouts that will blanket the elections in blue. Republicans will turn on Trump so fast — "I never even knew Trump." "Who is Trump? I never heard of him" come post-2028.

https://i.ibb.co/zHxkQn7q/bafkreickhiremkuuyl4ypibjkc6i4lhamf5svywu5mca33qou noqo5fn6q.jpg
:roll:

Blade so confident in a party that currently has no leader or one on the horizon. They have no idea what direction the party's going except for being highly supportive of hating Trump, loving undocumented illegals and putting Americans last.

Why do you support that Blade? I realize you want their votes to count but what other reason(s) can you give for your love of undocumented illegals?

[bladefd]

You sound like TheAlwaysWrongMan where you don't have any wins in the present and is instead left with fantasizing about the future, trying to get your win ahead of time. Remember how not too long ago you were so sure that Trump would go to jail and definitely never become President again?
The left is going to have a historic win in just 3 years while your party is in demise is quite unrealistic when the border isn't opening again for new voters and so many of the ones you've let in over the last years will have been deported by ICE instead of having received amnesty for crossing the border illegally and become US citizens.

Remember how 2018, 2020 and 2022 went? I expect the same this time around.

Too many people decided not to vote in 2024, and I hope Democrats learned from putting forth an incompetent candidate like Harris. Much like 2016, independents are turning on Trump. The Trump administration better push for everything they want right now for policy while they still have both houses of Congress, including making it tougher to vote, activating insurrection act and getting rid of mail-in-ballots.

Whoever runs for president in 2028 on the Republican side will have to distance themselves from Trump.

P.S. Show me proof that illegals have been voting in huge numbers or even significant numbers. I will wait. I don't think you understand the process of becoming an US Citizen.

[John8204]

Obama: "You'll get to keep your doctor"

Trump: "I need to inspect Miss Teen USA changing rooms"

[Hey Yo]

Remember how 2018, 2020 and 2022 went? I expect the same this time around.

Too many people decided not to vote in 2024, and I hope Democrats learned from putting forth an incompetent candidate like Harris. Much like 2016, independents are turning on Trump. The Trump administration better push for everything they want right now for policy while they still have both houses of Congress, including making it tougher to vote, activating insurrection act and getting rid of mail-in-ballots.

Whoever runs for president in 2028 on the Republican side will have to distance themselves from Trump.

P.S. Show me proof that illegals have been voting in huge numbers or even significant numbers. I will wait. I don't think you understand the process of becoming an US Citizen.

There's 14 states and D.C that don't require photo ID to vote and they're all Blue states.

Why you think only Blue states do this, Blade? What would be the main purpose for Dems wanting it like that?

[rmt]

You don't support deficit but have yet to say whether you support the historic taxcuts for the rich or not.

The reason for these social cuts is due in significant part to paying for the taxcuts. The way to balance the deficit is by cutting the excess AND not slashing the revenue. By cutting taxes, that lowers the revenue, so the cuts have to be even greater to balance the books. And even with the cuts, it won't make up for the revenue lost from taxcuts.

And it primarily impacts the poor and middle-class here. How can you justify that?

These tax cuts are keeping the same tax rate as ALL taxpayers have enjoyed over the past 8 years. If these tax cuts are allowed to expire, the DEMs would be the first to frame it as Republicans making taxes go up (just like the framing of the not extending the temporary covid aca extensions as cutting health care).

I do not support no taxes on tips or overtime or increase in senior exemption - they are just for getting votes. The overall (covering EVERYONE - not just the rich) tax cuts I would put in another category they are credited with supposedly helping the economy in Trump's 1st term. On the assumption that they will help similarly in his 2nd term, I'm ok with change in tax policy (see my previous statement about decision on how to spend money is winning elections) - that is EASILY changed by 51 senators/reconciliation of whichever party is in power.

ACA subsidy extension is an INSIDIOUS, PERMANENT EXPANSION of yet another social program that is IMPOSSIBLE to take back once people get used to money from the government. It is a totally different animal than tax policy. It is because of these social programs - Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, ACA that have grown and grown and have become untouchable holy grails and will only increase our debt - that is where the majority of money is spent.

Raise SS/Medicare age (for younger people), uncap SS income limit, invest SS/Medicare funds in S&P 500 low cost index funds, return to pre-covid government spending (get rid of all covid special funding), institute the DOGE cuts especially foreign aid, return Medicaid to its original intent (for children, pregnant women, disabled, elderly with income limits).

Given the choice between Democrats and Republicans, who do you think will spend MORE and increase yet more government spending on PERMANENT social programs (instead of EASILY CHANGEABLE tax policy). Why do you think Biden's administration/Democrats' 2020-24 did not UNDO Trump's tax cuts and raise taxes on the rich way up? (many of your dream wish) but instead chose increasing ACA subsidies.

[Baller234]

Too many people decided not to vote in 2024, and I hope Democrats learned from putting forth an incompetent candidate like Harris. Much like 2016, independents are turning on Trump. The Trump administration better push for everything they want right now for policy while they still have both houses of Congress, including making it tougher to vote, activating insurrection act and getting rid of mail-in-ballots.

Whoever runs for president in 2028 on the Republican side will have to distance themselves from Trump.

You guys said the same thing this last election, that the right was turning on Trump. You were saying this all the way up until the election. Was there a single lefty on this forum who predicted that Trump would win in a dominant landslide?

And now you want to make predictions three years out?

Can you tell us who's going to win the NBA finals too? :oldlol:

[bladefd]

There's 14 states and D.C that don't require photo ID to vote and they're all Blue states.

Why you think only Blue states do this, Blade? What would be the main purpose for Dems wanting it like that?

Do you have proof that illegals voted in significant numbers?

[bladefd]

These tax cuts are keeping the same tax rate as ALL taxpayers have enjoyed over the past 8 years. If these tax cuts are allowed to expire, the DEMs would be the first to frame it as Republicans making taxes go up (just like the framing of the not extending the temporary covid aca extensions as cutting health care).

I do not support no taxes on tips or overtime or increase in senior exemption - they are just for getting votes. The overall (covering EVERYONE - not just the rich) tax cuts I would put in another category they are credited with supposedly helping the economy in Trump's 1st term. On the assumption that they will help similarly in his 2nd term, I'm ok with change in tax policy (see my previous statement about decision on how to spend money is winning elections) - that is EASILY changed by 51 senators/reconciliation of whichever party is in power.

ACA subsidy extension is an INSIDIOUS, PERMANENT EXPANSION of yet another social program that is IMPOSSIBLE to take back once people get used to money from the government. It is a totally different animal than tax policy. It is because of these social programs - Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, ACA that have grown and grown and have become untouchable holy grails and will only increase our debt - that is where the majority of money is spent.

Raise SS/Medicare age (for younger people), uncap SS income limit, invest SS/Medicare funds in S&P 500 low cost index funds, return to pre-covid government spending (get rid of all covid special funding), institute the DOGE cuts especially foreign aid, return Medicaid to its original intent (for children, pregnant women, disabled, elderly with income limits).

Given the choice between Democrats and Republicans, who do you think will spend MORE and increase yet more government spending on PERMANENT social programs (instead of EASILY CHANGEABLE tax policy). Why do you think Biden's administration/Democrats' 2020-24 did not UNDO Trump's tax cuts and raise taxes on the rich way up? (many of your dream wish) but instead chose increasing ACA subsidies.

What is the need for additional taxcuts other than to fill the overflowing pockets of the rich? Taxcuts remove a large portion of the revenue as well, which requires bigger cuts to account for. Do you believe everyone, from the person making a billion in income annually to the person making 30k annually, should pay the same tax rate?

The reason that Republicans use for social cuts, including ACA, is fiscal responsibility. Does fiscal responsibility only apply to programs meant to help the poor/middle-class and not for taxcuts for the rich? I want you on the record here.

As for your last point, I give you this quote:

Of the last 16 presidents, 8 have been republican and 8 dem. The only republican to leave office with a smaller deficit than when they came in is Eisenhower. Yes, its a phenomenon we havent seen in 60 years. Bush had record spending, but in Trump’s defense Bush had 2 terms to do it. Trump is a “hold my beer” level federal spender, so when FISCAL CONSERVATIVES vote for these guys I’m thoroughly confused.

Why do we need gazillion bases around the world? Why are we still in Germany? How about we bring down the military budget to 600bn rather than raise it to a trillion? Do we really need so many redundant intelligence agencies and bases everywhere? There are so many other potential areas for these cuts that don't hamper social programs.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Do you have proof that illegals voted in significant numbers?

He believes everything Trump says. His word is the ultimate proof.

[Hey Yo]

Do you have proof that illegals voted in significant numbers?

Don't duck my question like you've done in other threads.... why such a fight for no ID required?

[Hey Yo]

Today will be the 8th vote, will Chuck continue to tell his cult Dems to vote no? Continue to chose politics over the people?

[rmt]

What is the need for additional taxcuts other than to fill the overflowing pockets of the rich? Taxcuts remove a large portion of the revenue as well, which requires bigger cuts to account for. Do you believe everyone, from the person making a billion in income annually to the person making 30k annually, should pay the same tax rate?

The reason that Republicans use for social cuts, including ACA, is fiscal responsibility. Does fiscal responsibility only apply to programs meant to help the poor/middle-class and not for taxcuts for the rich? I want you on the record here.

As for your last point, I give you this quote:


Why do we need gazillion bases around the world? Why are we still in Germany? How about we bring down the military budget to 600bn rather than raise it to a trillion? Do we really need so many redundant intelligence agencies and bases everywhere? There are so many other potential areas for these cuts that don't hamper social programs.

As far as I understand, the tax cut rates CONTINUE at the same rate of the past 8 years and not extending them will result in Dems vilifying Repubs as raising taxes. I notice you did not address my question as to why Biden/Dems did not revoke these tax cuts when they were in power if they are so OBNOXIOUS to Dems.

This is the text of the Tax and Spending Clause in the Constitution:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Debts and Defense are SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the Constitution. SS/Medicare/Medicaid would fall under "general Welfare" - established in 1935 and 1965. So, for 159 years and 189 years of this country's history, they did not exist. Now (in a very short 60 years) they consume 49% (+10% more if you include Income Security (SNAP)) - for a total of 59% of the budget compared to defense's 13%. At this rate, how much are these social programs going to consume over the next 60 years? They will only consume a bigger and bigger percent of the budget.

U.S. Government Spending, FYTD 2025
Top 10 Spending by Category and Agency
22 % Social Security
14 % Medicare
14 % Net Interest
13 % Health
13 % National Defense
10 % Income Security
5 % Veterans Benefits and Services
3 % Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
2 % Transportation
1 % Natural Resources and Environment
3 % Other

** Income Security in the federal budget refers to government programs and tax credits that provide assistance to individuals and families to help with basic needs, especially those who are unemployed, disabled, or have low incomes. This budget function includes a wide range of programs such as unemployment compensation, housing assistance, nutritional aid (like SNAP), and retirement and disability benefits for federal employees. It also includes refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit.

[ZenMaster]

Remember how 2018, 2020 and 2022 went? I expect the same this time around.

Too many people decided not to vote in 2024, and I hope Democrats learned from putting forth an incompetent candidate like Harris. Much like 2016, independents are turning on Trump. The Trump administration better push for everything they want right now for policy while they still have both houses of Congress, including making it tougher to vote, activating insurrection act and getting rid of mail-in-ballots.

Whoever runs for president in 2028 on the Republican side will have to distance themselves from Trump.

P.S. Show me proof that illegals have been voting in huge numbers or even significant numbers. I will wait. I don't think you understand the process of becoming an US Citizen.

All those illegal immigrants counting towards the census for dem congress seats and their would've been anchor babies turning into future dem voters, gone.

Nobody knows how many illegals vote in various blue states that does absolutely nothing to prevent them from doing so. All we know is they make rules to actively prevent that anyone has to identify themselves as a US citizen before voting. The data of who voted and their SS numbers sits with the states, Trump admin has been requesting it to investigate but the states are denying them the information.


The confrontation over access to voter data is likely to end up in court. The Justice Department opted to sue Orange County, California, as part of a federal probe into alleged non-citizen voting. Orange County officials have so far declined to share the individuals personal information with DOJ without a court order.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/09/01/politics/trump-voter-demands-social-security

Love all your corny "Trump admin better be shaking in their boots because bla bla bla", you've been spouting the exact same crap for years.

Future dem voters jumping the border are being deported and the actual US dems tell each other not to have kids because of "climate and an unsafe world". Rough times for the party of hate.

https://i0.wp.com/blexmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/denzel-washington-training-day.gif?resize=638%2C332&ssl=1

[Hey Yo]

Crickets from blade and Real Men Love Illegals.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Crickets from blade and Real Men Love Illegals.
If you knew what you were talking about you wouldn't want to be getting into a losing argument about Trump's illegal immigrant voting bs. The factual statistics on illegal voting show that it just isn't a problem. It's all about Trump's inability to accept that he lost in 2020 and you being the eternal sucker that you are believe him but there's no factual basis to any of it.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Trump just sent 20 billion dollars to Argentina. America First? Deficit spending? Sometimes these things matter and sometimes they don't, apparently.

[Hey Yo]

Why do only Blue states want no ID required to vote? What was the reason for your boy Biden to let over 15mil illegals into the U.S.?

All you do is duck questions, RMLI

[Real Men Wear Green]

Why do only Blue states want no ID required to vote? What was the reason for your boy Biden to let over 15mil illegals into the U.S.?

All you do is duck questions, RMLI

You may just be dumb enough to think no illegal immigrants entered under Trump and that they are allowed to vote but its a statement of fact that you have to be an American citizen to register to vote. You not knowing this is just you being ignorant. You being ignorant is not a particularly good argument. The states that don't require you to present ID to vote are that way because they figure some of their voters don't have ID, since you asked, but if I lose my license I am still an American citizen with the right to vote. If you are not an American citizen, again, you could never register to vote to begin with. So for your illegal immigrant to vote they would have to use the info of a registered voter to vote in their place. Which registered voters are complaining that someone stole their vote? It would have to be happening in the hundreds of thousands to turn an election in a state. But can you name a state where it happened, say, 20 times? If you can't then it's fair to say it's time to shut up already.

[ZenMaster]

You may just be dumb enough to think no illegal immigrants entered under Trump and that they are allowed to vote but its a statement of fact that you have to be an American citizen to register to vote. You not knowing this is just you being ignorant. You being ignorant is not a particularly good argument. The states that don't require you to present ID to vote are that way because they figure some of their voters don't have ID, since you asked, but if I lose my license I am still an American citizen with the right to vote. If you are not an American citizen, again, you could never register to vote to begin with. So for your illegal immigrant to vote they would have to use the info of a registered voter to vote in their place. Which registered voters are complaining that someone stole their vote? It would have to be happening in the hundreds of thousands to turn an election in a state. But can you name a state where it happened, say, 20 times? If you can't then it's fair to say it's time to shut up already.

Not true. If you're an illegal immigrant but have a drivers license, you can register to vote in many states without any problems at all, just listen to todays' hearing from Minnesota:

https://x.com/GrageDustin/status/1978135823234064752

[Real Men Wear Green]

Not true. If you're an illegal immigrant but have a drivers license, you can register to vote in many states without any problems at all, just listen to todays' hearing from Minnesota:

https://x.com/GrageDustin/status/1978135823234064752https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote

Those are local elections in some states, not National elections. Trump's ceaseless lies about the election being stolen have no merit.

[ZenMaster]

https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote

Those are local elections in some states, not National elections. Trump's ceaseless lies about the election being stolen have no merit.

It's illegal for non-citizens to vote in both state and federal elections across the US and your statement was that it's impossible to register if you're an illegal immigrant. Clearly it's not impossible at all and there's no indication that they handle federal elections any differently than state elections in Minnesota when it comes to voter rolls and who can register. It's my home state and I know they're letting immigrants run wild there, handing out drivers licenses left and right.

It's even right there in your own link:


Who cannot vote?
Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents, cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It's illegal for non-citizens to vote in both state and federal elections across the US and your statement was that it's impossible to register if you're an illegal immigrant. Clearly it's not impossible at all and there's no indication that they handle federal elections any differently than state elections in Minnesota when it comes to voter rolls and who can register. It's my home state and I know they're letting immigrants run wild there, handing out drivers licenses left and right.

It's even right there in your own link:Somehow you didn't read the line you quoted. "Who cannot vote? Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents, cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections."

So no, they could not vote in the Presidential elections, which is what Trump is talking about, not who gets elected as the county register of deeds. Which is why you can't find any proof of this epidemic of illegal voting. It doesn't exist.

[Hey Yo]

You may just be dumb enough to think no illegal immigrants entered under Trump and that they are allowed to vote but its a statement of fact that you have to be an American citizen to register to vote. You not knowing this is just you being ignorant. You being ignorant is not a particularly good argument. The states that don't require you to present ID to vote are that way because they figure some of their voters don't have ID, since you asked, but if I lose my license I am still an American citizen with the right to vote. If you are not an American citizen, again, you could never register to vote to begin with. So for your illegal immigrant to vote they would have to use the info of a registered voter to vote in their place. Which registered voters are complaining that someone stole their vote? It would have to be happening in the hundreds of thousands to turn an election in a state. But can you name a state where it happened, say, 20 times? If you can't then it's fair to say it's time to shut up already.

So then what is the REAL reason that you and Dems want as many undocumented illegals as possible in the U.S.?

Why so hell bent on that happening? Why would an administration sue a State (in the country they're in charge of) for adding further protection to keep the illegals (that you're in love with) out of their State?

Surely there's GOTTA BE an obvious answer.

[Real Men Wear Green]

To piss you off.

[ZenMaster]

Somehow you didn't read the line you quoted. "Who cannot vote? Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents, cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections."

So no, they could not vote in the Presidential elections, which is what Trump is talking about, not who gets elected as the county register of deeds. Which is why you can't find any proof of this epidemic of illegal voting. It doesn't exist.


Who cannot vote?
Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents, cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections.

If illegal immigrants can't vote in federal or state elections, why are they able to register for those elections? How are they not being blocked in the registration process? You can see for yourself at 37:00 in the hearing, in Minnesota the requirements to vote are the same for the different type of elections, so if you can register for state elections you can also for federal.


https://youtu.be/d4YiUA2Uib0

Anyways, this is a dumb conversation, same as the last years when you were insisting there was no problem with illegal immigration and if there was, it was only due to repubs not agreeing to a new border bill. You'll lie and be fake about anything to try and keep having the conversation go in circles.

[Real Men Wear Green]

If illegal immigrants can't vote in federal or state elections, why are they able to register for those elections? How are they not being blocked in the registration process? You can see for yourself at 37:00 in the hearing, in Minnesota the requirements to vote are the same for the different type of elections, so if you can register for state elections you can also for federal.


https://youtu.be/d4YiUA2Uib0

Anyways, this is a dumb conversation, same as the last years when you were insisting there was no problem with illegal immigration and if there was, it was only due to repubs not agreeing to a new border bill. You'll lie and be fake about anything to try and keep having the conversation go in circles.

This is mainly a dumb conversation because you insist on defending Trump's lies about a stolen election. You are hanging on some minutes of this hearing in Minnesota when it is established federal law that an illegal immigrant cannot vote in the presidential election. If some local election allows them to vote for some local office based on their local law then whatever but that's definitely a rarity as established by the fact that I asked you guys to come with just 20 cases of something like that when hundreds of thousands would be needed to sway most state elections and all you are coming with is this Minnesota video and your assumption that if they can vote in some local elections then they must be able to vote in federal elections in spite of that being illegal.

They can't do that in Minnesota, the state that video is from, FYI. (https://www.kare11.com/article/news/politics/verify-undocumented-immigrants-cannot-vote-in-minnesota/89-7814b251-1f43-4570-ae39-65968cddbbdf)

I am sure that you have tried to find evidence of this illegal voting epidemic and you can't, but being the bullshit artist that you are, you won't own up to that fact.

[bladefd]

Don't duck my question like you've done in other threads.... why such a fight for no ID required?

I have no issue with showing my ID - I have for years.

Do you have proof that illegals voted in significant numbers? Let's see what you have to say here. The burden of proof is on your to show evidence for this claim made.

[bladefd]

As far as I understand, the tax cut rates CONTINUE at the same rate of the past 8 years and not extending them will result in Dems vilifying Repubs as raising taxes. I notice you did not address my question as to why Biden/Dems did not revoke these tax cuts when they were in power if they are so OBNOXIOUS to Dems.

This is the text of the Tax and Spending Clause in the Constitution:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Debts and Defense are SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the Constitution. SS/Medicare/Medicaid would fall under "general Welfare" - established in 1935 and 1965. So, for 159 years and 189 years of this country's history, they did not exist. Now (in a very short 60 years) they consume 49% (+10% more if you include Income Security (SNAP)) - for a total of 59% of the budget compared to defense's 13%. At this rate, how much are these social programs going to consume over the next 60 years? They will only consume a bigger and bigger percent of the budget.

U.S. Government Spending, FYTD 2025
Top 10 Spending by Category and Agency
22 % Social Security
14 % Medicare
14 % Net Interest
13 % Health
13 % National Defense
10 % Income Security
5 % Veterans Benefits and Services
3 % Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
2 % Transportation
1 % Natural Resources and Environment
3 % Other

** Income Security in the federal budget refers to government programs and tax credits that provide assistance to individuals and families to help with basic needs, especially those who are unemployed, disabled, or have low incomes. This budget function includes a wide range of programs such as unemployment compensation, housing assistance, nutritional aid (like SNAP), and retirement and disability benefits for federal employees. It also includes refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit.

To answer your question:

To repeal the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and enact new tax laws, Democrats needed a strong, unified majority in both the House and Senate. After winning the presidency in 2020, Democrats only held narrow majorities in Congress and faced resistance from some moderate members. This made a full repeal, which could have been politically challenging, infeasible.

I believe you need 60 votes in Senate. Democrats didn't have 60 votes to revoke the taxcuts. Joe Manchin and Krystin Sinema would never back it even as Democrats. A few moderate Democrats wouldn't either.

The only other way would be through budget reconciliation. Democrats would have to disregard the Manchins and Sinemas of the Democrat party, and politically it would look real bad to fracture the party to pass it through. Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats have more fragility. Remember, every state gets two senators. With more red states, it causes moderate Democrats from red states to go against their constituents. They often can't do without losing support in their state.

Biden could have pushed to rescind the taxcuts. Lets consider the circumstances. We were coming out of the COVID economic collapse and shutdowns from 2020 to 2023, so he wasn't going to push for killing taxcut in that situation. In 2024 post-COVID recovery, he proposed increasing taxes though, but he didn't have the votes to get that through Congress https://www.americanprogress.org/article/biden-tax-proposals-would-correct-inequities-created-by-trump-tax-cuts-and-raise-additional-revenues/

For your other point:
Most Americans support SS/Medicare/Medicaid, including a large majority of MAGA. Good luck killing them and ever winning another election. Republicans know it.

There is the potential to combine healthcare into universal healthcare, but it hasn't been approached by either party. It can potentially save money because it would allow a single agency to negotiate rather than every agency/insurance company for themselves. Take it up with them for not pushing it.

[bladefd]

All those illegal immigrants counting towards the census for dem congress seats and their would've been anchor babies turning into future dem voters, gone.

Nobody knows how many illegals vote in various blue states that does absolutely nothing to prevent them from doing so. All we know is they make rules to actively prevent that anyone has to identify themselves as a US citizen before voting. The data of who voted and their SS numbers sits with the states, Trump admin has been requesting it to investigate but the states are denying them the information.



https://edition.cnn.com/2025/09/01/politics/trump-voter-demands-social-security

Love all your corny "Trump admin better be shaking in their boots because bla bla bla", you've been spouting the exact same crap for years.

Future dem voters jumping the border are being deported and the actual US dems tell each other not to have kids because of "climate and an unsafe world". Rough times for the party of hate.


That's right. Nobody knows, and there is no proof to say otherwise. We saw the same nonsense arguments in 2020, and the courts laughed Giuliani and other idiots out of the court for lack of proof even after vast investigations. Trump administration tried in 2020, but they had nothing. Are you saying 2024 was different? Trump won that election due to millions who voted for Biden not going to vote.

You are not even an US citizen who lives here. Why do you care from Eastern Europe or Russia or wherever you live and whoever you work for.

[bladefd]

You may just be dumb enough to think no illegal immigrants entered under Trump and that they are allowed to vote but its a statement of fact that you have to be an American citizen to register to vote. You not knowing this is just you being ignorant. You being ignorant is not a particularly good argument. The states that don't require you to present ID to vote are that way because they figure some of their voters don't have ID, since you asked, but if I lose my license I am still an American citizen with the right to vote. If you are not an American citizen, again, you could never register to vote to begin with. So for your illegal immigrant to vote they would have to use the info of a registered voter to vote in their place. Which registered voters are complaining that someone stole their vote? It would have to be happening in the hundreds of thousands to turn an election in a state. But can you name a state where it happened, say, 20 times? If you can't then it's fair to say it's time to shut up already.

He and Zen are morons who have no idea what it takes it takes to register to vote.

I had to provide more than one piece of evidence to register. I provided my photo ID and ss number. Both can verify citizenship upon access on system, so either would work. When I voted, I had to sign to match the signature I registered with. There's no same-day registration in my state AFAIK. If someone registered without ID, they are required to provide copy of one of the following to verify name/address in the system:
NJ driver’s license or non-driver ID
U.S. passport
Military or government ID
Bank statement
Utility bill
Paycheck or government check
Any government document showing your name and address

Can an illegal person get these things? Perhaps theoretically can open a bank account for bank statement or own/rent a house in their official name for utility bill or paycheck.

Lets say someone did get that non-photo ID. Are large numbers going to risk felony charges? On the voter registration form, they would have to lie about being US citizen. While being illegal and potential to get thrown out of the country, mind you. They risk instant deportation, prison, and may permanently prohibit them from getting green card or citizenship in the future if there's a pathway. Illegals typically stay far away from any such risks. They are going to risk everything for a vote?

Lets say they lied there too. Next, the county runs a check of your name across DMV, SS, and jury duty databases to verify that you are in one of the systems. If you aren't, county flags you for further checks, which you likely won't pass.

It would take someone insane to attempt all this for a single vote.

[Hey Yo]

I have no issue with showing my ID - I have for years.

Do you have proof that illegals voted in significant numbers? Let's see what you have to say here. The burden of proof is on your to show evidence for this claim made.

I don't care about you showing an ID... why were Dems so adamant about letting in as many undocumented illegals as possible into the country?

Why is it so important to them that they're prioritizing illegals over Americans?

[Hey Yo]

Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

Not sure who the "us" is but it clearly shows he's putting politics over the people.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5547212-democrats-blamed-for-shutdown/

[Baller234]

It doesn't matter if illegals are voting or they aren't, having and presenting a voter ID should be the standard for all 50 states.

Anyone advocating otherwise is extremely suspect.

[Hey Yo]

Yes, Illegal Aliens Get Medicaid and ObamaCare—Protecting That is Why Democrats Shut Down the Government
October 16, 2025

https://thefga.org/blog/yes-illegal-aliens-get-medicaid-and-obamacare-protecting-that-is-why-democrats-shut-down-the-government/

[ZenMaster]

He and Zen are morons who have no idea what it takes it takes to register to vote.

I had to provide more than one piece of evidence to register. I provided my photo ID and ss number. Both can verify citizenship upon access on system, so either would work. When I voted, I had to sign to match the signature I registered with. There's no same-day registration in my state AFAIK. If someone registered without ID, they are required to provide copy of one of the following to verify name/address in the system:
NJ drivers license or non-driver ID
U.S. passport
Military or government ID
Bank statement
Utility bill
Paycheck or government check
Any government document showing your name and address

Can an illegal person get these things? Perhaps theoretically can open a bank account for bank statement or own/rent a house in their official name for utility bill or paycheck.

Lets say someone did get that non-photo ID. Are large numbers going to risk felony charges? On the voter registration form, they would have to lie about being US citizen. While being illegal and potential to get thrown out of the country, mind you. They risk instant deportation, prison, and may permanently prohibit them from getting green card or citizenship in the future if there's a pathway. Illegals typically stay far away from any such risks. They are going to risk everything for a vote?

Lets say they lied there too. Next, the county runs a check of your name across DMV, SS, and jury duty databases to verify that you are in one of the systems. If you aren't, county flags you for further checks, which you likely won't pass.

It would take someone insane to attempt all this for a single vote.

I didn't say anything about the 2020 election, that was you and RMWG. If many millions are deported over the next few years you're going to need a miracle in the future by turning republicans into democrats. The Biden admin were giving them SSNs and those illegal immigrants would have received amnesty and turned into voting citizens had dems remained in power. Hell, RMWG even thought 500.000 Venezuelans had already been so, referring to them as legal citizens earlier in this very thread.

That being said, can you prove the bolded in your statement, that if an illegal tries to vote in NJ, election officials will reject them because they're notified as it happens?
And if that's true, wouldn't you agree that it's a great safe guard when the election officials can see if the person voting isn't a citizen so they can stop it?

[Real Men Wear Green]

I didn't say anything about the 2020 election, that was you and RMWG.And Trump, who is the reason why this is being discussed. You can go back to your bullshitting, just wanted to point that out.

[Baller234]

I forgot who said it but it's so true.

It was something along the lines of... "the fundamental rule of being a lefty is pretending to not understand things".

[Hey Yo]

I forgot who said it but it's so true.

It was something along the lines of... "the fundamental rule of being a lefty is pretending to not understand things".

Real Men Love Illegals isn't pretending... he's just a retard with TDS.

[ShawkFactory]

I forgot who said it but it's so true.

It was something along the lines of... "the fundamental rule of being a lefty is pretending to not understand things".

Seems like you'd make natural allies with them then.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Hell, RMWG even thought 500.000 Venezuelans had already been so, referring to them as legal citizens earlier in this very thread.I hadn't bothered to read this far when I replied before but it should be pointed out that this lying asshole is lying again. I didn't say they were legal citizens I said that they were here legally and they were until Trump had their protected status revoked so that he could declare them to be illegal. You're too shameless with the bullshitting.

[bladefd]

I didn't say anything about the 2020 election, that was you and RMWG. If many millions are deported over the next few years you're going to need a miracle in the future by turning republicans into democrats. The Biden admin were giving them SSNs and those illegal immigrants would have received amnesty and turned into voting citizens had dems remained in power. Hell, RMWG even thought 500.000 Venezuelans had already been so, referring to them as legal citizens earlier in this very thread.

That being said, can you prove the bolded in your statement, that if an illegal tries to vote in NJ, election officials will reject them because they're notified as it happens?
And if that's true, wouldn't you agree that it's a great safe guard when the election officials can see if the person voting isn't a citizen so they can stop it?

There was no pathway to citizenship for those illegals to become US citizens. Even if you get an SS number, you won't show up as an US citizen in the system when the county runs a check on your name when you register to vote.

Does amnesty give them path to citizenship? Perhaps you know something I don't. Link me to a source, and I will admit to being wrong if amnesty would have led illegals to become citizens.

The county maintains a voter database.


Statewide database: New Jersey keeps a central database of all registered voters. You can use the state's online portal to check your status at any time.

County-level oversight: Each county's election office—often the Board of Elections or the Commissioner of Registration—is responsible for the day-to-day management of voter records within its jurisdiction. This includes:

-Processing new registrations.
-Updating voter information, such as name or address changes.
-Verifying eligibility and removing ineligible voters from the rolls.

When you go to register, the county automatically runs your name in their databases. If someone isn't found in any database, they are flagged. The election office runs manual checks on the flagged people. I don't know exactly what happens if the office can't verify someone through any database. I don't know how every state does it.

[warriorfan]

I forgot who said it but it's so true.

It was something along the lines of... "the fundamental rule of being a lefty is pretending to not understand things".

Fits like a glove. You have to be extremely intellectually dishonest to prop up a lot of their talking points.

[Baller234]

Fits like a glove. You have to be extremely intellectually dishonest to prop up a lot of their talking points.

Look at how HIGHwhey ignores crime and laughs at people when they point to life real life examples of people being killed.

All because he feels obligated to cosplay as a woke revolutionary.

[warriorfan]

Look at how HIGHwhey ignores crime and laughs at people when they point to life real life examples of people being killed.

All because he feels obligated to cosplay as a woke revolutionary.

Well highwhey isn’t being intellectually dishonest he’s actually that stupid legitimately.

[Chick Stern]

Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

Not sure who the "us" is but it clearly shows he's putting politics over the people.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5547212-democrats-blamed-for-shutdown/

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1279494632845213798/1428449203688050758/IMG_20251016_124441_442.jpg?ex=68f3dbfd&is=68f28a7d&hm=37aca9b1582729c7f336ff45b7fc73e131a0625fb3ea1ba b0f5ee78f9135f5f5&

[Lakers Legend#32]

Republicans hate government so shutting it down is their wet dream.

[Hey Yo]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1279494632845213798/1428449203688050758/IMG_20251016_124441_442.jpg?ex=68f3dbfd&is=68f28a7d&hm=37aca9b1582729c7f336ff45b7fc73e131a0625fb3ea1ba b0f5ee78f9135f5f5&

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5547212-democrats-blamed-for-shutdown/
Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

https://thefga.org/blog/yes-illegal-aliens-get-medicaid-and-obamacare-protecting-that-is-why-democrats-shut-down-the-government/

[Chick Stern]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5547212-democrats-blamed-for-shutdown/
Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

https://thefga.org/blog/yes-illegal-aliens-get-medicaid-and-obamacare-protecting-that-is-why-democrats-shut-down-the-government/
FGA - lol.

A) emergency room medical care was ruled on by the Supreme Court ages ago.
B) it is against the law for illegal immigrants to get Medicaid.

Federal law restrictions: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA) of 1996 prohibits undocumented immigrants from accessing most federal public benefits, including Medicare and Medicaid, except for some emergency services.
Proof of eligibility: To enroll in Medicare, individuals must prove their U.S. citizenship or qualified legal residency. Undocumented immigrants, by definition, cannot satisfy this requirement.

Notice you didn’t comment on what I posted.
Neither paying the troops, or protecting pedos.

[Hey Yo]

Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

That's ^^^^^ why the troops aren't getting paid, chico.... politics (your boys) over the people.

[Chick Stern]

Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

That's ^^^^^ why the troops aren't getting paid, chico.... politics (your boys) over the people.
No zeppo, as it says they’ve introduced a bill to pay the troops. Your people hate the military.

[Hey Yo]

21st day of the shutdown, it's been voted down 11x now and Schumer still claiming this is a good thing for the Dems.

[Chick Stern]

21st day of the shutdown, it's been voted down 11x now and Schumer still claiming this is a good thing for the Dems.

"In my opinion, I hear the Democrats are gonna be blamed, I hear Republicans are gonna be blamed, I actually think the president would be blamed," he said. "If there is a shutdown ... I think it would be a tremendously negative mark on the president of the United States. He's the one that has to get people together." - Donald Trump

[Off the Court]

"In my opinion, I hear the Democrats are gonna be blamed, I hear Republicans are gonna be blamed, I actually think the president would be blamed," he said. "If there is a shutdown ... I think it would be a tremendously negative mark on the president of the United States. He's the one that has to get people together." - Donald Trump


https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EfPSg3h6HXw

[Hey Yo]

Trump's people are together on this. Only 5 Dems needed to vote yes, but Schumer's instructed his people to vote no.

Schumer was the deciding yes vote back in March cause he said it's what's good for the people. Now he's doing the opposite cause he thinks that's what's good for his political future, not caring about the people.

Chuck first and the people last is why the Democrat shutdown continues to move forward.

[Hey Yo]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EfPSg3h6HXw

2011 lol

[Off the Court]

2011 lol

What difference does that make?

[Off the Court]

"I think it would be a tremendously negative mark on the president of the United States. He's the one that has to get people together."

"Needs to get people together"



Says the GOAT DIVIDER. :oldlol:

[Chick Stern]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1279494632845213798/1428449210411257917/IMG_20251016_124822_120.jpg?ex=68f921ff&is=68f7d07f&hm=ec38ee3551e92b6a561c1bbfe99190ab52b79d0289a1dcb 2408e481906c80e82&

[bladefd]

Chuck Schumer:

the longer it stays shutdown, the better it is for us

That's ^^^^^ why the troops aren't getting paid, chico.... politics (your boys) over the people.

Troops are getting paid. Go look it up. It's from DoD's r+d funds

[Hey Yo]

Democrat Whip Rep. Katherine Clark: "Shutdowns are terrible. Of course there will be families that are going to suffer. We take that responsibility seriously, but it is one of the few leverage times we have."

https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1981030242513809641?s=19


A high-ranking Democrat appears to have admitted an inconvenient truth about the government shutdown that has officially entered its fourth week.

Massachusetts Representative Katherine Clark, who is the Minority Whip of the United States House of Representatives, admitted that she views families struggling during the shutdown as 'leverage' for her party to use in political games.

'Shutdowns are terrible. And of course there will be families that are going to suffer. We take that responsibility very seriously, but it is one of the few leverage times we have,' Clark said.

Wisconsin Republican Congressman Derrick Van Orden wrote on X, 'This is exactly what Chuck Schumer meant when he said, "Every day gets better for us."'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15216457/Top-Dem-admits-shutdown-leverage.html

[Hey Yo]

Senate just voted down to pay essential federal workers and military.

[bladefd]

Democrat Whip Rep. Katherine Clark: "Shutdowns are terrible. Of course there will be families that are going to suffer. We take that responsibility seriously, but it is one of the few leverage times we have."

https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1981030242513809641?s=19


A high-ranking Democrat appears to have admitted an inconvenient truth about the government shutdown that has officially entered its fourth week.

Massachusetts Representative Katherine Clark, who is the Minority Whip of the United States House of Representatives, admitted that she views families struggling during the shutdown as 'leverage' for her party to use in political games.

'Shutdowns are terrible. And of course there will be families that are going to suffer. We take that responsibility very seriously, but it is one of the few leverage times we have,' Clark said.

Wisconsin Republican Congressman Derrick Van Orden wrote on X, 'This is exactly what Chuck Schumer meant when he said, "Every day gets better for us."'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15216457/Top-Dem-admits-shutdown-leverage.html

What's the alternative? Allow everyone's annual insurance premiums to increase by 118%? Do you support that after historic taxcuts that Republicans rushed quickly through and 150 billion for ICE (among others but these were the two big things in the Big & Beautiful bill)?

[MMM]

Should Government shutdows trigger an election. If both sudes are equally confident that the other side will be blamed or their policy is popular than take it to the people

[bladefd]

Should Government shutdows trigger an election. If both sudes are equally confident that the other side will be blamed or their policy is popular than take it to the people

It would result in a blue wave across the line :oldlol:

[rmt]

Should Government shutdows trigger an election. If both sudes are equally confident that the other side will be blamed or their policy is popular than take it to the people

LOL - we had an election less than a year ago - it's not like Trump didn't campaign on many of the things he's done.

[MMM]

LOL - we had an election less than a year ago - it's not like Trump didn't campaign on many of the things he's done.

He should have been given a bigger mandate. An election would either led to 1 side compromising or getting punished at the polla but either way the govermwnt would function better

[ZenMaster]

I hadn't bothered to read this far when I replied before but it should be pointed out that this lying asshole is lying again. I didn't say they were legal citizens I said that they were here legally and they were until Trump had their protected status revoked so that he could declare them to be illegal. You're too shameless with the bullshitting.

It's called Temporary Protected Status and the Biden admin misused this to get as many illegals into the country as possible. You could argue that people should go to jail for this, but better to just focus on getting the illegal immigrants out of the country.


There was no pathway to citizenship for those illegals to become US citizens. Even if you get an SS number, you won't show up as an US citizen in the system when the county runs a check on your name when you register to vote.

Does amnesty give them path to citizenship? Perhaps you know something I don't. Link me to a source, and I will admit to being wrong if amnesty would have led illegals to become citizens.

If dems would've still been in charge, I'm sure that along with uniparty repubs they would've found numerous ways to provide pathways to citizenship. Much of the reasoning to provide citizenship is the same as currently used to say they shouldn't be deported(been here long time, part of the community, good for the country etc) and they had already started this in 2024:


President Joe Biden on Tuesday announced a new effort to provide a path to citizenship to hundreds of thousands of immigrants in the U.S. illegally who are married to U.S. citizens, an election-year move that contrasts sharply with Republican rival Donald Trump's plan for mass deportations.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-offers-path-citizenship-spouses-us-citizens-election-year-gambit-2024-06-18/



The county maintains a voter database.

When you go to register, the county automatically runs your name in their databases. If someone isn't found in any database, they are flagged. The election office runs manual checks on the flagged people. I don't know exactly what happens if the office can't verify someone through any database. I don't know how every state does it.

In Minnesota you're automatically registered if you have a drivers license, and all residents in the state can get a drivers license. These are both new laws made in 2024. So now when you go to vote you just have to show your drivers license and then if there's discrepancy with your address, maybe a name change that wasn't updated, or if you're an illegal immigrant, you get a document to sign stating that you're a citizen residing in Minnesota, but you aren't actually prevented from voting which doesn't make sense.

[bladefd]

If dems would've still been in charge, I'm sure that along with uniparty repubs they would've found numerous ways to provide pathways to citizenship. Much of the reasoning to provide citizenship is the same as currently used to say they shouldn't be deported(been here long time, part of the community, good for the country etc) and they had already started this in 2024:



https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-offers-path-citizenship-spouses-us-citizens-election-year-gambit-2024-06-18/




In Minnesota you're automatically registered if you have a drivers license, and all residents in the state can get a drivers license. These are both new laws made in 2024. So now when you go to vote you just have to show your drivers license and then if there's discrepancy with your address, maybe a name change that wasn't updated, or if you're an illegal immigrant, you get a document to sign stating that you're a citizen residing in Minnesota, but you aren't actually prevented from voting which doesn't make sense.

Democrats have been in charge plenty of times. Do you think the party just started yesterday? They had plenty of opportunities to push through a pathway to citizenship, but they knew it wouldn't get through.

As for the second, if an illegal is married to an US citizen, why is it wrong to allow that individual to become citizen? My cousin married my cousin-in-law from Japan (citizen of Japan), and she became an US citizen in a year. Why should it be different for illegals? It should only be illegal if it's a money-based marriage. I believe such cases are looked into if suspected, especially if they aren't living together.

I'm not sure about Minnesota or other states. I haven't looked into every state to see what all of their requirements are. Perhaps someone else here has or perhaps there's an in-depth article that looks into all 50 states? Still, that doesn't prove that massive national voting fraud happens every election. It shouldn't be that difficult for the US government to prove on a state-by-state basis. Trump tried hard in 2020, but he & his lawyers got laughed out of courts for lack of evidence.

I'm unsure what you're even arguing at this point. Is it possible in some states for an illegal to find a way to vote? Probably yes. Now, the next question is: has it been proven? No. Without proving that's it's a widespread phenomena with hard evidence, what difference does any of it make? Trump cried election fraud in 2016 after he beat Hillary and created a committee to investigate (wasn't Pence in charge?). That got nowhere. He cried in 2020 while he was president and spent tens of millions, only for Rudy and company to get laughed out for lack of evidence. He cried again after winning in 2024. Three times, and he won two of those elections. It sounds to me like the boy who cried wolf. And you sound like the boogie man.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It took this assclown 10 days to reply that a bunch of people the government told were hear legally are actually here illegally, just that the government was breaking the law. Fortunately for him there is no law against being full of shit but I am going to declare that 10-day wait makes your bullshit officially·stale.

[ZenMaster]

It took this assclown 10 days to reply that a bunch of people the government told were hear legally are actually here illegally, just that the government was breaking the law. Fortunately for him there is no law against being full of shit but I am going to declare that 10-day wait makes your bullshit officially·stale.

Whatever BS reason they came up with in 2023 to give all those Venezuelans and Haitians that Temporary Protected Status no longer applies and so they have to go back home.


Democrats have been in charge plenty of times. Do you think the party just started yesterday? They had plenty of opportunities to push through a pathway to citizenship, but they knew it wouldn't get through.

Doesn't matter how you try to deflect, they introduced a new pathway to citizenship just last year. Here's Chuck Schumer laying it out clearly that all illegal immigrants should get citizenship.


https://youtu.be/grwnbk6lxdo


As for the second, if an illegal is married to an US citizen, why is it wrong to allow that individual to become citizen? My cousin married my cousin-in-law from Japan (citizen of Japan), and she became an US citizen in a year. Why should it be different for illegals? It should only be illegal if it's a money-based marriage. I believe such cases are looked into if suspected, especially if they aren't living together.

A blanket rule like that would open up for all kinds of human trafficking and fraud. Also, you shouldn't be rewarded for breaking the law for 10 years just because you got married.


I'm unsure what you're even arguing at this point.

I was saying that the Democrat party is in demise due to plummeting birth rates and all those illegal immigrants who will be deported instead of counting towards seats in congress and potentially as future voters.

[Hey Yo]

Whatever BS reason they came up with in 2023 to give all those Venezuelans and Haitians that Temporary Protected Status no longer applies and so they have to go back home.
I tried to explain to Real Men Loves Illegals that things change when new administration's take over. He saw examples like stopping the building of the border wall and when the keystone pipeline construction was stopped by Biden. He had no problems.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and he's crying like a bitch. If ya don't like it, don't let the border door hit ya in the ass. Go join Rosie O'Donnell wherever TF she went to live with her TDS.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It's strange how you guys don't understand that they were here legally. You liking our not liking the reason why does not change the facts. Sane people accept the fact that Biden was the president even if they didn't like him.

The bullshit didn't take 10 days but it's still bullshit.

[bladefd]

Doesn't matter how you try to deflect, they introduced a new pathway to citizenship just last year. Here's Chuck Schumer laying it out clearly that all illegal immigrants should get citizenship.


https://youtu.be/grwnbk6lxdo



A blanket rule like that would open up for all kinds of human trafficking and fraud. Also, you shouldn't be rewarded for breaking the law for 10 years just because you got married.



I was saying that the Democrat party is in demise due to plummeting birth rates and all those illegal immigrants who will be deported instead of counting towards seats in congress and potentially as future voters.

Pathway to citizenship has been talked about for lord knows how long. Perhaps 30yrs ago? It has never gotten through and been nothing other than a talking point.

So, should anyone who marries a U.S. citizen get citizenship, in your opinion? Or must you be born in the USA for citizenship?

There are already significantly more democrat voters than Republican. Independents are the ones who decide elections. Illegal immigrants don't vote in significant numbers, as you have been trying to claim. As for being future voters, the bill guaranteeing them citizenship has to actually get through Congress. Democrats don't have 60 votes in the Senate to get it through, and they haven't tried to push such a bill through. If they may in the future, is your entire argument based on "coulda woulda should"?? You're grasping at straws here, boogeyman.

[rmt]

The next time Democrats hold the Senate, the filibuster rule will be gone and every Dem wish list item from making DC and Puerto Rico states to packing the Supreme Court to giving all illegals a very short path to citizenship to universal healthcare will pass the Senate. I can only hope that either of the House/Presidency is in Republican hands but we all know, it goes in waves - whichever party wins the Presidency gets the House and Senate for the first 2 years. God help this country then.

Even Fetterman is saying that Republicans should "carve out" the filibuster to re-open the government. Such a STUPID idea - that opens the door to use it for whatever. I thought he'd be the only sane Democrat left (like Sinema and Manchin) but apparently not.

[Hey Yo]

THE LONGER IT STAYS SHUTDOWN, THE MORE IT BENEFITS US!!!


Chuck Schumer

[ZenMaster]

Pathway to citizenship has been talked about for lord knows how long. Perhaps 30yrs ago? It has never gotten through and been nothing other than a talking point.

There are already significantly more democrat voters than Republican. Independents are the ones who decide elections. Illegal immigrants don't vote in significant numbers, as you have been trying to claim. As for being future voters, the bill guaranteeing them citizenship has to actually get through Congress. Democrats don't have 60 votes in the Senate to get it through, and they haven't tried to push such a bill through. If they may in the future, is your entire argument based on "coulda woulda should"?? You're grasping at straws here, boogeyman.

It's like it's impossible for you to imagine things being different in the future than they are today. Around 80% of dems want illegal immigrants to get a pathway to citizenship and that's a lot of support, hell wasn't it Obama who tried writing an executive order on it? Even in recent years dems have been trying to get bills passed on it.

Just like pathway to citizenship has been talked about for perhaps 30 years, so has mass deportation, and all of the sudden a guy came around who's up for it. Stating that something won't happen because it's been talked about for a long time doesn't make sense, e.g once upon a time illegal immigrants weren't allowed to vote in local elections, but now they are.


So, should anyone who marries a U.S. citizen get citizenship, in your opinion? Or must you be born in the USA for citizenship?

I never said you have to be born in the US to get citizenship, immigrants becomes Americans all the time through regular and legal channels. I think that anyone married to a US citizen should be able to apply.

[ZenMaster]

It's strange how you guys don't understand that they were here legally. You liking our not liking the reason why does not change the facts. Sane people accept the fact that Biden was the president even if they didn't like him.

The bullshit didn't take 10 days but it's still bullshit.

Ok, they came in legally under a temporary order that stated something was wrong in their own country and these people can't live there. Now it's been deemed that temporary order no longer is needed because whatever was wrong in Venezuela and Haiti is fixed and they can go and live there again, so they need to leave legally as well, right?

[Hey Yo]

Democrat Chris Coons

"The shutdown is our only moment of leverage'

[Real Men Wear Green]

Ok, they came in legally under a temporary order that stated something was wrong in their own country and these people can't live there. Now it's been deemed that temporary order no longer is needed because whatever was wrong in Venezuela and Haiti is fixed and they can go and live there again, so they need to leave legally as well, right?

You may as well give up. Everyone is wrong sometimes. Or in your case, all the time. It's OK.

[highwhey]

Ok, they came in legally under a temporary order that stated something was wrong in their own country and these people can't live there. Now it's been deemed that temporary order no longer is needed because whatever was wrong in Venezuela and Haiti is fixed and they can go and live there again, so they need to leave legally as well, right?

i wish you could see from a 3rd party POV how much of an imbecile you look like to everyone else

[ZenMaster]

You may as well give up. Everyone is wrong sometimes. Or in your case, all the time. It's OK.

I don't know if you were tricked into thinking these people would magically get to stay in the US under a new administration or if you just lied about it, but fact remains that the the temporary protective order is no longer:


After reviewing country conditions and consulting with the appropriate U.S. government agencies, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem determined that Venezuela no longer meets the conditions for its designation for Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and that the termination of the 2023 Venezuela TPS designation is required as it is contrary to the national interest. On October 3, 2025, the Supreme Court allowed the termination to take immediate effect. TPS beneficiaries who received an Employment Authorization Document on or before February 5, 2025, with a ‘Card Expires’ date of October 2, 2026, will maintain work authorization until October 2, 2026.

Separately, Secretary Noem published her notice to terminate the Venezuela 2021 designation, which is effective on Nov. 7, 2025, at 11:59 p.m. See Termination of the 2021 Designation of Venezuela for Temporary Protected Status, 90 Fed. Reg. 43225 (Sept. 8, 2025).

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/temporary-protected-status

[Hey Yo]

Real Men Loves Illegals refuses to admit he's wrong. That's the first tell that he can't be taken seriously and deserves to be treated like a child.

Move over existence is pain..... we now have TDS is pain

[Real Men Wear Green]

I see we are still arguing with facts.

[bladefd]

The next time Democrats hold the Senate, the filibuster rule will be gone and every Dem wish list item from making DC and Puerto Rico states to packing the Supreme Court to giving all illegals a very short path to citizenship to universal healthcare will pass the Senate. I can only hope that either of the House/Presidency is in Republican hands but we all know, it goes in waves - whichever party wins the Presidency gets the House and Senate for the first 2 years. God help this country then.

Even Fetterman is saying that Republicans should "carve out" the filibuster to re-open the government. Such a STUPID idea - that opens the door to use it for whatever. I thought he'd be the only sane Democrat left (like Sinema and Manchin) but apparently not.

If anyone has actually broken the filibuster in recent years, it has been Republicans under Mitch McConnell. But something you will never speak out against. Instead, you're more worried about "coulda woulda shoulda." :facepalm

[bladefd]

It's like it's impossible for you to imagine things being different in the future than they are today. Around 80% of dems want illegal immigrants to get a pathway to citizenship and that's a lot of support, hell wasn't it Obama who tried writing an executive order on it? Even in recent years dems have been trying to get bills passed on it.

Just like pathway to citizenship has been talked about for perhaps 30 years, so has mass deportation, and all of the sudden a guy came around who's up for it. Stating that something won't happen because it's been talked about for a long time doesn't make sense, e.g once upon a time illegal immigrants weren't allowed to vote in local elections, but now they are.



I never said you have to be born in the US to get citizenship, immigrants becomes Americans all the time through regular and legal channels. I think that anyone married to a US citizen should be able to apply.

It's impossible for you to see things being the same in the future because you're the boogeyman. Partisan boogeyman who doesn't realize that the economics of Republicans and Democrats doesn't actually differ very much.

Did you know that for 2021-2023, Democrats held house/senate/presidency majority? That was 2yrs ago. Do you think the party changed significantly from 2yrs ago?

[ZenMaster]

I see we are still arguing with facts.

Must be sad having a mind like this where the facts are laid out for you and you have to resort to argumentative tactics of a 10 year old. Fact is that all those people now have to leave and no judge will try and block it as being illegal, because the Supreme Court has already said it isn't because it's not longer a TPS country. And if they don't leave, then they're illegal aliens who will be hunted down by ICE and deported.

If you want to make a coherent argument as to why these people should get to stay you can go ahead and make it instead of acting like a child.


It's impossible for you to see things being the same in the future because you're the boogeyman. Partisan boogeyman who doesn't realize that the economics of Republicans and Democrats doesn't actually differ very much.

Did you know that for 2021-2023, Democrats held house/senate/presidency majority? That was 2yrs ago. Do you think the party changed significantly from 2yrs ago?

If things were looking to be the same I'd argue it, but the people with a mindset to vote for democrats are currently having a lot less babies than the people voting for republicans, so things will definitely change in the future and it's why dems were desperately trying to get as many foreigners into the country as possible last time they held office. E.g the fertility rate in California is down more than 25% since 2008 when it was 2.1, today it's below 1.5.


https://youtu.be/hrOTC3sxwQA

[Real Men Wear Green]

10 year-olds are capable of reading facts, like: the immigrants were here legally and then Trump had the law changed so that he can deport them" and processing said information. You are not. 10 year-olds are smarter than you.

[rmt]

If anyone has actually broken the filibuster in recent years, it has been Republicans under Mitch McConnell. But something you will never speak out against. Instead, you're more worried about "coulda woulda shoulda." :facepalm

Your memory appears to be slipping:

1. An earlier post where you claimed that Biden needed 60 Senate votes to UNDO Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts when I asked why Dems didn't if these tax cuts were such an abomination to them. If Republicans needed only majority to ENACT them (and in 2025 - continue them), then surely Biden could have UNDONE them with simple Senate majority when Dems owned Congress and Presidency. As if Manchin and Sinema were enough to get to 60 - lol. That post was weak, but I didn't have time to comment back then.


2. Harry Reid first broke the filibuster - McConnell just extended it to include Supreme Court justices.

AI Overview

Harry Reid is not known for filibustering, but rather for a significant procedural change he orchestrated as Senate Majority Leader in 2013, often called the "nuclear option". Frustrated by Republican obstruction of President Obama's judicial nominees, Reid used a simple majority vote to eliminate the need for a 60-vote threshold to end a filibuster for most executive and lower-level judicial appointments. This move lowered the confirmation threshold from 60 to 51 votes, but still allowed for filibusters of Supreme Court nominees and legislation.

What it was: The "nuclear option" was a procedural vote that changed Senate rules to remove the 60-vote requirement for cloture (ending a filibuster) on presidential nominations, except for Supreme Court justices.

Why it happened: The decision was a direct response to what Democrats saw as excessive obstruction by Republicans in the confirmation of President Obama's nominees.

Consequences: While the change allowed for more nominations to be confirmed with a simple majority, it was controversial and led to a precedent that was later used by Republicans to eliminate the Supreme Court filibuster as well.

Legacy: Reid's move is considered a landmark event in modern Senate history, fundamentally altering the chamber's dynamics and foreshadowing further changes to the filibuster rules

[ZenMaster]

10 year-olds are capable of reading facts, like: the immigrants were here legally and then Trump had the law changed so that he can deport them" and processing said information. You are not. 10 year-olds are smarter than you.

Trump didn't change the law anymore than Biden did.

Biden changed the law to designate Venezuela as a TPS country and the immigrants from there came in legally under the temporary order.

Trump changed the law to remove the designation of Venezuela as a TPS country, so the temporary order for those immigrants to stay in the US is no longer in effect and they are illegal if they stay.

Those are the official facts and like you said yourself they aren't citizens.

[Hey Yo]

Day 30 of the Democratic shutdown and no further voting will be done this week.

:facepalm

[bladefd]

Your memory appears to be slipping:

1. An earlier post where you claimed that Biden needed 60 Senate votes to UNDO Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts when I asked why Dems didn't if these tax cuts were such an abomination to them. If Republicans needed only majority to ENACT them (and in 2025 - continue them), then surely Biden could have UNDONE them with simple Senate majority when Dems owned Congress and Presidency. As if Manchin and Sinema were enough to get to 60 - lol. That post was weak, but I didn't have time to comment back then.


2. Harry Reid first broke the filibuster - McConnell just extended it to include Supreme Court justices.

AI Overview

Harry Reid is not known for filibustering, but rather for a significant procedural change he orchestrated as Senate Majority Leader in 2013, often called the "nuclear option". Frustrated by Republican obstruction of President Obama's judicial nominees, Reid used a simple majority vote to eliminate the need for a 60-vote threshold to end a filibuster for most executive and lower-level judicial appointments. This move lowered the confirmation threshold from 60 to 51 votes, but still allowed for filibusters of Supreme Court nominees and legislation.

What it was: The "nuclear option" was a procedural vote that changed Senate rules to remove the 60-vote requirement for cloture (ending a filibuster) on presidential nominations, except for Supreme Court justices.

Why it happened: The decision was a direct response to what Democrats saw as excessive obstruction by Republicans in the confirmation of President Obama's nominees.

Consequences: While the change allowed for more nominations to be confirmed with a simple majority, it was controversial and led to a precedent that was later used by Republicans to eliminate the Supreme Court filibuster as well.

Legacy: Reid's move is considered a landmark event in modern Senate history, fundamentally altering the chamber's dynamics and foreshadowing further changes to the filibuster rules

1) Senate would have to overcome filibuster through reconciliation if they wanted to reverse taxcuts with less than 60 vote majority. Democrats didn't have 60-vote majority but didn't even have enough votes for reconciliation for Harris to be tiebreaker. The Democrat majority couldn't go for reconciliation then without 50 votes. I've no idea what your point is here. Republicans had Vance do tiebreaker vote after going through reconciliation for big beautiful bill, which passed the taxcuts.

2) I forgot about Reid. So, I believe Republicans had refused to pass any Obama nominee for courts after he won the second term election. Reid broke the filibuster by changing the rules, much like McConnell in 2017.

It still doesn't overtake the fact that you're more worried about "coulda, woulda, shoulda" than what has actually happened.

In order for any of the claims you made ("every Dem wish list item from making DC and Puerto Rico states to packing the Supreme Court to giving all illegals a very short path to citizenship to universal healthcare will pass"), Senate Democrats would need 60-vote unity to pass all those things or break filibuster through reconciliation & Democrat VP votes it through. In either situation, Democrats would need a majority in the Senate, House, and VP to be democrat.


TL; DR:
So, here's the procedural breakdown of options to break filibuster:
1) 60-vote majority ends filibuster and gets through
2) Lacking #1, you can use reconciliation to get through. Reconciliation requires at least 50 senators. If you have 51+ votes, you don't need VP to break tie
3) If you can get to 50 votes for reconciliation but can't reach 51+, then VP breaks the tie

Big Beautiful Bill required #3 to pass (yes, Republicans resorted to reconciliation). Ending taxcuts under Biden in 2021-2023 would require 50 senators for reconciliation, which they didn't have. Manchin and Sinema wouldn't budge, which left Democrats with 49 Senators. Without reconciliation, a simple majority cannot end taxcuts.

These are the facts. Something your partisan mind cannot comprehend.

[Norcaliblunt]

Lmao at anyone caring about a government shut down.

If you rely on the gov you a beyatch!!!!!

lol at conservatives caring about a government shutdown.

[ZenMaster]

It's impossible for you to see things being the same in the future because you're the boogeyman. Partisan boogeyman who doesn't realize that the economics of Republicans and Democrats doesn't actually differ very much.

Did you know that for 2021-2023, Democrats held house/senate/presidency majority? That was 2yrs ago. Do you think the party changed significantly from 2yrs ago?

You think Obama misunderstood the question here about immigrants being able to vote without facing repercussions?

https://x.com/WarClandestine/status/1984713051933749467

[Baller234]

You think Obama misunderstood the question here about immigrants being able to vote without facing repercussions?

https://x.com/WarClandestine/status/1984713051933749467

I would seriously love for any democrat on this forum to defend this.

I'm betting they will all pretend this post doesn't exist.

[ShawkFactory]

You think Obama misunderstood the question here about immigrants being able to vote without facing repercussions?

https://x.com/WarClandestine/status/1984713051933749467

I'd suggest you watch it back and pay attention to the last quote in particular. "If you happen to have a family member who is undocumented". Any small clip can be taken out of context and he it seems he clearly isn't talking about encouraging illegals to flood the country and vote Democrat.

He's talking about people who have friends or family members who work in this country and contribute positively.

It's all about how you interpret things and of course I have my biases too, but this doesn't seem as malicious as you think it is.