2018-19 #TrumpShutdown Day 12 Open Thread

“When they talk about the government shutdown, they’re going to be talking about the president of the United States, who the president was at that time. They’re not going to be talking about who was the head of the House, the head the Senate, who’s running things in Washington. So I really think the pressure is on the president.”

–Donald Trump, 9/2013

18 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. itlduso says:

    The front page of the Denver Post's sports section headline article is about the New Orleans Pelicans versus the Minnesota Timberwolves NBA game on Monday written by an AP sports reporter.  There is no Denver connection in the story.  It appears that some type of mistake resulted in the paper printing a front page story that was written for a New Orleans or Minnesota audience.

    Unless January 2 has now become the new April 1, this is going to be a very weird year.


    • Diogenesdemar says:

      Maybe they’re hoping to be traded away from the Broncos ??? . . . 

    • Davie says:

      Curious— my 2 star electronic edition available at 5am this morning has Nuggets and Bronco coverage on the front page of the sports section.  Are you in the boonies and getting an early, early bird edition perhaps?

      Or, as you say, Alden’s print shop in Adams county could have tangled up the printers which supply many other papers on the same production lines.

  2. Voyageur says:

    Well, we're officially in the 15 month period where we all have to pretend we give a tinker's dam about Iowa.  Life is hard.sad

  3. Pseudonymous says:

    LMAO.  Y'all Dems don't even know how to win.

    Nancy Pelosi Rams Austerity Provision Into House Rules Package Over Objections of Progressives

    Presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who will be sworn in on Thursday, has promised for months to restore the pay-go rule, which she instituted when first taking over the speaker’s gavel in 2007. She ran into resistance from progressives, who believe that the rule would make it more difficult for Democrats to pass a host of liberal agenda items, from “Medicare for All” to a Green New Deal to tuition-free public college. Critics also argue that pay-go creates an unlevel playing field, where Republicans get to blow giant holes in the tax code, as they did with the 2017 tax cuts, while Democrats must pay fealty to the deficit.

    “There’s enormous appetite in the Democratic Party and among all Americans for major public investment to tackle our nation’s major crises: deepening inequality and structural racism and climate disaster,” said Waleed Shahid, communications director for Justice Democrats, in a statement to The Intercept. “Pelosi and the Democratic Party leadership’s support of Paygo makes actually solving these crises all but impossible. The Democratic Party leadership is unilaterally disarming and shooting themselves in the foot.”

    • RepealAndReplace says:

      The answer is quite simple. If the LWNJs want to spend a lot of money on free stuff for people, they simply need to combined that legislation with tax increases – presumably only on "rich" people. (Whatever that means.)

      There is nothing wrong with Pay-Go. 


      • JohnInDenver says:

        Depending on WHICH version of pay-go was "rammed in"  (by a majority vote, presumably), it means only that in the House, something has to be popular enough to get a slightly larger majority, a willingness to explicitly write in that the bill is an exception to the rules, or a revenue source (higher taxes or off-set from somewhere else) to pass.

        In this Congress, it won't matter for Democratic goals. Anything the House is going to pass that costs money or is particularly progressive won't go anywhere in the Senate, and certainly wouldn't be allowed to be a "win" by the *resident, so he'd veto it.

        On the other hand, it provides an additional way to sink Republican maneuvers — "where's the money?" can expose Republican hypocrisy on some versions of "health care reform" or a 350 ship Navy.

        In a choice between Democrats, I'd prefer Nancy Pelosi, soon to be the new Speaker, over Waleed Shahid, a communication professional (I've not heard of before) for a fringe advocacy group.

        • Pseudonymous says:

          Nobody cares about Republican hypocrisy– least of all Republicans.  It's a fight you guys can have, but it's not a worthwhile one. Y’all act as if winning the news cycle is actually winning.

          Also, there are others who oppose Paygo.  Like these hard leftists…[checks notes]…economist Paul Krugman and Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer?

    • mamajama55 says:

      I'd like to think that this is some 3 – D chess move on Pelosi's part – obviously we can't pay for Drumpf's sacred Wall because it isn't pay-go, (it’s magic money, just the way Trump received $413 million from Daddy Trump anytime he needed it) – so it's an attempt to appeal to  deficit hawk Republicans.

      But it probably isn't 3D chess, and it won't appeal to deficit hawks – because nobody talks about the frigging deficit anymore, now that the GOP has stopped pretending to care. The infamous debt clock has been removed from all of the GOP pages I browse.

      And the deficit has increased 17% over last year.


      I’d love to hear from some of our GOP trolls if any are still lurking – Moderatus, Carnegie, Negev, Pear – does pay-go make ya wanna dance with the Dems in the pale moonlight?

      • Voyageur says:

        I don 't regard either Negev or Pear as a troll.  Just a gunnie and a conservative Republican, respectively.

        Oh, you get down the fiddle and you get down the bow

        kick off your shoes and you throw 'em on the floor.

        dance in the kitchen 'til the morning light.

        Louisiana Saturday night!

        Now, if that song don't get you dancin', it's time to call the coroner.

      • Pseudonymous says:

        It isn't chess. She, and Democrats like her, actually like PAYGO.  What I'm curious to see is how many House "progressives" choose, along with Ro Khanna, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to vote against the rules package that includes this.

        The bad economics of PAYGO swamp any strategic gain from adopting it

        The strength of evidence supporting this political claim [that PAYGO makes Dems look fiscally responsible and helps get votes] is debatable. What’s less debatable is that PAYGO really has hindered progressive policymaking in the not-so-recent past. For example, it was commitments to adhere to PAYGO that led to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) having underpowered subsidies for purchasing insurance and, even more importantly, having a long lag in implementation; the law passed in January 2010 yet the exchanges with subsidies only were up and running by 2014. This implementation lag meant that the ACA’s benefits were not as sunk into Americans’ economic lives by the time a hostile Republican Congress and administration began launching attacks on it following the 2016 elections. It is a real testament to how much better the ACA made life for Americans that it has been stubbornly resistant to these attacks. But it would have been helpful to have a couple more years to have it running smoothly, but that didn’t happen largely because the ACA’s architects wanted to meet PAYGO rules over the 10-year budget window.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.