Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mcorioles

Trump To Wine and Dine Pelosi and Schumer

52 posts in this topic

46 minutes ago, mcorioles said:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/moderate-democrats-heading-white-house-meeting-tax-reform/story?id=49808510

 

I love it.

If the Repubs are going to be wusses make a deal with the Dems.

Who wouldn't like to be a fly on the wall at that dinner!

 

 

I agree.  He previously warmed the fannies of McConnell and Ryan.  Now ***** slap them.  Maybe they will wake up and smell the coffee.  They don't have stonewall power if Trump appeals to Dems.  

Edited by jdsample

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump fancies himself the great dealmaker. Schumer bringing a gun to this knife fight. Trump has burnt his bridges with the GOP leadership and Schumer knows it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll see how serious he is by the number of ice cream scoops the dems get.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jdsample said:

I agree.  He previously warmed the fannies of McConnell and Ryan.  Now ***** slap them.  Maybe they will wake up and smell the coffee.  They don't have stonewall power if Trump appeals to Dems.  

They don't?

I'm not sure if Trump is looking for a friend or sanctuary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jdsample said:

I agree.  He previously warmed the fannies of McConnell and Ryan.  Now ***** slap them.  Maybe they will wake up and smell the coffee.  They don't have stonewall power if Trump appeals to Dems.  

Why would the party controlling both chambers and the WH need to stonewall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Why would the party controlling both chambers and the WH need to stonewall?

Because the Repubs are wusses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ms maggie said:

Trump fancies himself the great dealmaker. Schumer bringing a gun to this knife fight. Trump has burnt his bridges with the GOP leadership and Schumer knows it.

No, I disagree.  This is pretty similar to what everyone proclaimed as political brilliance of Clinton's Triangulation Strategy.  Schumer has a bridge, but the Republicans' bridge will always be there.  

Ryan and McConnell have to live with this for another three years minimum.  If they want to have any influence during that time they need to realize they no longer have veto power over everything.  I would not be surprised if Trump's next move is to bypass Ryan & McConnell and go directly to Republicans in Congress.  And then support primary challenges to Republican road blocks.  

The next three years should be interesting.  I think more than one book will be written about it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jdsample said:

No, I disagree.  This is pretty similar to what everyone proclaimed as political brilliance of Clinton's Triangulation Strategy.  Schumer has a bridge, but the Republicans' bridge will always be there.  

Ryan and McConnell have to live with this for another three years minimum.  If they want to have any influence during that time they need to realize they no longer have veto power over everything.  I would not be surprised if Trump's next move is to bypass Ryan & McConnell and go directly to Republicans in Congress.  And then support primary challenges to Republican road blocks.  

The next three years should be interesting.  I think more than one book will be written about it.  

1 minute ago, jdsample said:

No, I disagree.  This is pretty similar to what everyone proclaimed as political brilliance of Clinton's Triangulation Strategy.  Schumer has a bridge, but the Republicans' bridge will always be there.  

Ryan and McConnell have to live with this for another three years minimum.  If they want to have any influence during that time they need to realize they no longer have veto power over everything.  I would not be surprised if Trump's next move is to bypass Ryan & McConnell and go directly to Republicans in Congress.  And then support primary challenges to Republican road blocks.  

The next three years should be interesting.  I think more than one book will be written about it.  

I doubt it. Trump doesn't have Clinton's understanding of how to get things done. Plus he has no "sticktoitiveness".

He just wants to sign a bill and declare victory.

We'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Why would the party controlling both chambers and the WH need to stonewall?

Kind of a moot question when quite clearly we see that they have.  The GOP is infected with independent thinkers and establishment loyalists.  They would not line up with Trump even if McConnell and Ryan told them to.  OTOH the Democrat vote in Congress is unanimous.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jdsample said:

Kind of a moot question when quite clearly we see that they have.  The GOP is infected with independent thinkers and establishment loyalists.  They would not line up with Trump even if McConnell and Ryan told them to.  OTOH the Democrat vote in Congress is unanimous.  

Didn't you just suggest Trump's brilliant strategy is going to be bypassing the GOP leadership to appeal directly to Congressspeople?

The GOP stonewalled Obama. Odd you think they'll do the same minus Obama. Kinda sounds like they just like to obstruct.

And Dems vote unanimously? How many Rs voted for Obamacare?

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Didn't you just suggest Trump's brilliant strategy is going to be bypassing the GOP leadership to appeal directly to Congressspeople?

The GOP stonewalled Obama. Odd you think they'll do the same minus Obama. Kinda sounds like they just like to obstruct.

And Dems vote unanimously? How many Rs voted for Obamacare?

If necessary.  If McConnell & Ryan don't bring something to the table, they will be irrelevant.  I would not be surprised if they both lose their leadership positions if not their seats in Congress in 3 years unless they decide they want to accomplish something.  

I think you are missing the fact that Trump is not one of "them."  I think he is resented for blowing away a dozen traditional Republican candidates who thought it was their turn.  You aren't supposed to be able to jump to the head of the line and win.  And then expect cooperation.  

How many Democrats voted against Obamacare?  They did change a 250 year old rule of Congress so they could pass it.  (probably a permanent destructive act to our republic.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jdsample said:

If necessary.  If McConnell & Ryan don't bring something to the table, they will be irrelevant.  I would not be surprised if they both lose their leadership positions if not their seats in Congress in 3 years unless they decide they want to accomplish something.  

I think you are missing the fact that Trump is not one of "them."  I think he is resented for blowing away a dozen traditional Republican candidates who thought it was their turn.  You aren't supposed to be able to jump to the head of the line and win.  And then expect cooperation.  

How many Democrats voted against Obamacare?  They did change a 250 year old rule of Congress so they could pass it.  (probably a permanent destructive act to our republic.)

39 Dems voted against Obamacare.

http://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-who-voted-against-obamacare-keep-your-plan-2013-11

And you're missing the fact that Trump provides no leadership. He wants tax reform. He wants infrastructure. He wants immigration reform. Where is the proposed legislation?

And he has yet to learn actions have consequences. You think McCain forgot Trump's loathsome comments about him? 

Let me know when the winning starts.

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, workerbee said:

We'll see how serious he is by the number of ice cream scoops the dems get.  

Let's not get carried away. The dignity of the office of the presidency is at stake here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would only be mildly surprised if Trump announced he was changing parties, started name pro-choice justices and got on board with Medicare for all "because they promised me that they'd call it Trumpcare".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Let's not get carried away. The dignity of the office of the presidency is at stake here.

🍨🍨

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

39 Dems voted against Obamacare.

http://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-who-voted-against-obamacare-keep-your-plan-2013-11

And you're missing the fact that Trump provides no leadership. He wants tax reform. He wants infrastructure. He wants immigration reform. Where is the proposed legislation?

And he has yet to learn actions have consequences. You think McCain forgot Trump's loathsome comments about him? 

Let me know when the winning starts.

Those points I will not vigorously argue.  Although he could be George Patton but if he were an outsider the cats in Congress would not follow him.  It isn't simply leadership, it is also background and reputation.  

I am simply encouraged that he recognizes that unless he can compromise and gain some cooperation from across the aisle, he might have a majority in the Senate that are Republicans, but he does not have a majority of votes without some Democrats.  I think they thought the Reed Rule in the Senate meant those two things were the same.  Not so.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

🍨🍨

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Let's not get carried away. The dignity of the office of the presidency is at stake here.

Carried away?  Why the thought of actually trying to get something done... so... 80's! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, workerbee said:

Carried away?  Why the thought of actually trying to get something done... so... 80's! 

The ice cream thing?  That comes perilously close to sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hst2 said:

I would only be mildly surprised if Trump announced he was changing parties, started name pro-choice justices and got on board with Medicare for all "because they promised me that they'd call it Trumpcare".

I wouldn't be surprised about that either.  It was a big part of the reason I wouldn't vote for him.  He has always openly supported and stated liberal positions on a number of things.  His whole life he has been more of a liberal than a conservative.   I could see him changing sides just to stick it to republicans.  Not to mention he would love the historical annotations on being the first president ever to switch parties in the WH.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jdsample said:

Those points I will not vigorously argue.  Although he could be George Patton but if he were an outsider the cats in Congress would not follow him.  It isn't simply leadership, it is also background and reputation.  

I am simply encouraged that he recognizes that unless he can compromise and gain some cooperation from across the aisle, he might have a majority in the Senate that are Republicans, but he does not have a majority of votes without some Democrats.  I think they thought the Reed Rule in the Senate meant those two things were the same.  Not so.  

Hey I'm all for compromise. The real problem with Trump IMHO is he has no positions, no core principles. So what is he asking people to compromise FOR?

It's weird. Normally you think a leader fights for a certain outcome. Trump wants to sign bills. He's not for or against compromise. Just wants those signing ceremonies. Again, my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may have met to discuss tax reform but it's being reported they reached an agreement on DACA.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/13/trump-and-democrats-reach-a-daca-deal--without-the-border-wall.html

"We had a productive meeting at the White House with the President. The discussion focused on DACA. We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that's acceptable to both sides."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0