ewsieg

I read up from the bottom and just saw you mention democratic operative. I wrote that assuming the congressman said it and I felt that was a bit of a jump. Sounds like he was a democrat and I can understand the reasoning of calling someone that does a mass shooting a terrorist, so I guess he's not wrong, but as pfife said it was a gratuitous shot with the adjective he used.

I've argued just this for some time. For most, but not all posters, the response has generally been any Wall = Trump = bad/racist/stupid, with no room for a nuanced view.

He volunteered for Sanders presidential campaign, seems quite a bit of a jump from that to 'operative' though.

https://apnews.com/article/border-wall-biden-immigration-texas-rio-grande-147d7ab497e6991e9ea929242f21ceb2 Safe to assume we're all pro-wall now?

My brother said he found this on Reddit

You guys might be right about Youngkin, i'm just saying pointing out what appears to be more of an anecdotal issue affecting a very small group of people, which the state appears to be taking steps to correct and ensure no one else is affected seems like a cheap shot. I can give you plenty of anecdotal, but true stories of people having trouble with their democratically controlled states or with the democratically run federal government that shouldn't be used as evidence of incompetence against the democrat executive.

So they have identified 2 people....2. And for each of those, they were felons, reinstated, but had additional violations which appeared to incorrectly strip them. A man in Detroit was able to vote for Biden using his dad's mail in ballot (true, but not complete story), obviously you wouldn't support Whitmer now, correct? I don't really know enough about this guy. A never-Trumper friend of mine lives in Virginia and has been pleased with him.

Sounds like Liz Cheney was lobbying democrats yesterday telling them not to support McCarthy regardless of the offer. I'd love to see the Dems nominate her. A single GOP vote would give that member the Cheney/Kinzinger treatment so there is no chance, but it would be fun to see her approach the threshold and get the GOP nervous.

Time to vote in a new speaker. One thing I failed to account for when I thought the Dems could try and get something out of this.... they just have. Guessing a very embarrassing day or two for the GOP in trying to get another speaker voted in.

He pushed himself in a corner to get this job, I suspect he'll back himself in quite a bit more to retain it. That said, every point each of you make about this pending outcome is legitimate. I think the democrats can get something out of this, how much I don't know. There isn't much to lose on their end, if he balks, rather by his own hand or due to the unmanageable filth he's in charge of, it really doesn't hurt the dems. If he comes through with something promised, it's a bonus.

I don't see those tweets as saying they aren't on board, I see them as invites to come talk to them.

I suspect this is the route we see, assuming Gaetz is around long enough to force a vote on McCarthy. That said, Gaetz refused to compromise on anything and now McCarthy has to give in to demands from the Dems in order to keep his seat. If the dems push to hard, they may end up with nothing as well.

Obstruction of justice charge is a felony and hence why some are bringing up 1/6. Just ridiculous, almost as ridiculous as the shutdown crap that led him to do it.

You really believe Bush allowed Bin Laden to escape just so they could have a boogeyman?

Shawn Fain / UAW update - talks continue with all 3 companies. Two more plants going on strike at Noon, GM/Lansing, and Ford/Chicago. He says really good talks with Stellantis just this morning. He drove home the point that Biden stood on the line with them.

Somewhat expect a surprise pick by Newsom. I suspect he's going to try and find an older black women that has no interest in running so Lee can't lambast him for going against a promise, but at the same time, not influencing what is currently looking like a Porter/Schiff/Lee battle.

I know she technically was still working. Mentally she's been out of it for awhile. California has been represented by her last two chief of staffs for awhile now. Well them and that other senator that told her to 'just vote aye' recently.

To be fair to Fienstein, she stopped working awhile ago.

Sounds like we're on the same page. Only thing i'd mention is the border patrol has asked for more wall, not a wall from the gulf of mexico to the pacific, but they have identified areas that they feel could benefit them if there is a wall, which is in part why walls were being built under bipartisan support prior to Trump making it an issue.

Absolutely agree with this, almost seems like our decades long policy toward central America maybe wasn't the best in hindsight. As for explaining the GOP thoughts on immigration, I can't speak to them as the only thing I hear out of them is the wall. I see no legitimate plan from them either. That's in part why I'm been voting democrat, as the other party cares more about getting a kudo's from Trump than substance. I'm merely pointing out whatever they claim they are doing on immigration isn't working and I still am not sure if that's by design or incompetence.

What are your concerns of an open border? Your response seems to indicate the reasons the GOP gives are wrong, yet you indicate you have some issues. I feel the GOP had no legitimate plan to deal with the border, just haven’t seen one from the left either. also, why do you disagree with bombing Mexico? Do you not agree that Ukraine should be able to engage any Russian targets, regardless where they are?

I'm not concern trolling, maybe I just didn't express myself right. It was a question to try and understand the left's thought on immigration as a whole. I do have concerns and I laid some of those out and did point out that even some dems seem to have concerns. In short though, do you folks on the left have no concern, some, or a lot of concern about immigration and additionally, are those concerns based on a perceived real issue or just political. I guess if you were in charge and had full control to do what you wanted, would you keep status quo and wonder why it's even being reported, would you believe some slight changes were needed, or would you take an entirely different approach to dealing with something you do think is an issue.

I don't understand how they don't see the bad optics with this. I listened to someone the other day mention that even if you didn't agree about the reason for past shutdowns, you could point to a specific dispute that led to it. There really isn't anything solid here outside of the inability to make a compromise by the right. I would love to know what McCarthey said in the alleged screaming match with Gaetz behind closed doors. I suspect it's what he should say publicly, but he's too much of a whiny little scared bitch to do it.

McClain? She's my rep, not that I voted for her though. She tried to claim she was heading to congress to deal with economic issues, since she has gotten in she does nothing but tote how much she supports Trump, if I remember correctly she brought Jim Jordan in for a visit....it's been a **** show.

Interesting. I was never in the military, but one thing that I suspect is overblown in this article though is the centralized vs decentralized context. It's not like the old days where it might take a day to get a message back to the general about changes at the front line, it's real time. My uncle has mentioned to me that they would get real time feedback from morning raids in Iraq that resulted in changes in how they did afternoon raids. Low level leaders were still able to make changes, even if the overall directive didn't change right away.