Tweet. You KNOW it will be a tweet.Ibanez wrote:Also, all Trump has to do is send a post it to Congress saying, " It's all good." and he's fulfilled his constitutional duty.Skjellyfetti wrote:The State of the Union is by invitation of the Speaker of the House. He doesn't really have a choice.
He can but I think he's at the point now where he's not likely to change the distribution of public opinion much. He's got a large minority of the population that has consistently supported him but it's a minority. I think the majority of the People don't believe him. They know what he is.GannonFan wrote:No rule saying that he can't give it in the Senate chamber.Skjellyfetti wrote:The State of the Union is by invitation of the Speaker of the House. He doesn't really have a choice.
No rule saying he has to ggive a speech at all.GannonFan wrote:No rule saying that he can't give it in the Senate chamber.Skjellyfetti wrote:The State of the Union is by invitation of the Speaker of the House. He doesn't really have a choice.
Skjellyfetti wrote:Tweet. You KNOW it will be a tweet.Ibanez wrote: Also, all Trump has to do is send a post it to Congress saying, " It's all good." and he's fulfilled his constitutional duty.
Exactly. 
No rule that says it has to be a full joint session of Congress. Constitution just says he needs to inform Congress. And if the Dems aren't coming anyway you don't need as much space. Maybe he'll sneak in on one of the Capitol tours and do it then?Ibanez wrote:No rule saying he has to ggive a speech at all.GannonFan wrote:
No rule saying that he can't give it in the Senate chamber.
But the Senate Chamber can't hold all of Congress, the Supreme Court Justices, the cabinet, dignitaries, pizza delivery boys, etc.. It's a dog and pony show these days.
Maybe they can get Soros to give it, huh?JohnStOnge wrote:He can but I think he's at the point now where he's not likely to change the distribution of public opinion much. He's got a large minority of the population that has consistently supported him but it's a minority. I think the majority of the People don't believe him. They know what he is.GannonFan wrote:
No rule saying that he can't give it in the Senate chamber.
In fact I don't know if the Democrats shouldn't have just let him flail about then had a professionally managed presentation afterwards to rebut him. I got at least one response laughing at the idea of auditions but I was serious. This was their chance to plan ahead and really focus on someone who would provide a good presentation in a professionally arranged setting. To me they had the advantage because they know who is going to be giving the other side (Trump) and they pretty much know what he's going to say. If it were me I'd make sure to compare what Trump is doing to holding hostages and talking about how that makes it bigger than just the $5 billion or so involved. If you give into extortion once the perpetrator is going to see that it works and do it again and again. Thus the explanation of why they have to stand strong. In the meantime they could've had fact checkers identifying all the misinformation Trump is certain to spout during his presentation so whoever they have make the presentation can address that.
As I type I'm seeing a MSNBC anchorette ask if the Democrats are missing an opportunity to make Trump look bad. It's not hard to do.
GannonFan wrote:No rule that says it has to be a full joint session of Congress. Constitution just says he needs to inform Congress. And if the Dems aren't coming anyway you don't need as much space. Maybe he'll sneak in on one of the Capitol tours and do it then?Ibanez wrote: No rule saying he has to ggive a speech at all.
But the Senate Chamber can't hold all of Congress, the Supreme Court Justices, the cabinet, dignitaries, pizza delivery boys, etc.. It's a dog and pony show these days.
https://www.foxnews.com/auto/government ... ckup-truckBy Gary Gastelu | Fox News
The federal government shutdown could start affecting vehicle sales in a big way...
FCA CEO Mike Manley told The Detroit News that the shutdown has stalled EPA approval for one of the new heavy duty pickups it revealed at the Detroit Auto Show this week...
...Ram is planning to put the important models on sale this spring... but the Ram 3500 that made headlines with the most powerful pickup engine ever has yet to have its papers stamped...
I could easily find 800,000 feds to put on furlough that we would not miss for one minute...in fact, I’d be thrilled if those positions were simply eliminated...SDHornet wrote:If there is no funding for the wall/fence/barrier/whatever, why would McConnell take it up? Heard someone on the radio say that basically the wall funding Trump is requesting in the Fed budget is equivalent to a household income of $44k looking at a $57 fee/bill.
Just checked the Yahoo headlines on their main page and not one article at the top of the queue on the shutdown. So time to ask this question: when the average person stops giving a **** about the shutdown (because it largely doesn't impact them), how long before they start asking why we even need these people on the dole?
Col Hogan wrote:
I could easily find 800,000 feds to put on furlough that we would not miss for one minute...in fact, I’d be thrilled if those positions were simply eliminated...
That would be surgically cutting the dole...
The problem with this shutdown is its like using a meat cleaver to perform surgery...lots of the 800,000 are critical positions, and we’re forcing them to either work unpaid or furloughing them...
So who are you going to cut?Col Hogan wrote:I could easily find 800,000 feds to put on furlough that we would not miss for one minute...in fact, I’d be thrilled if those positions were simply eliminated...SDHornet wrote:If there is no funding for the wall/fence/barrier/whatever, why would McConnell take it up? Heard someone on the radio say that basically the wall funding Trump is requesting in the Fed budget is equivalent to a household income of $44k looking at a $57 fee/bill.
Just checked the Yahoo headlines on their main page and not one article at the top of the queue on the shutdown. So time to ask this question: when the average person stops giving a **** about the shutdown (because it largely doesn't impact them), how long before they start asking why we even need these people on the dole?
That would be surgically cutting the dole...
The problem with this shutdown is its like using a meat cleaver to perform surgery...lots of the 800,000 are critical positions, and we’re forcing them to either work unpaid or furloughing them...
Jon, I would cut my own position, honestly. But Dave's point stands here. The federal government bloat can be methodically reduced in a smart way. Using federal employees as political pawns is not the way to go. Early retirement offers and RIFs are the smarter way to go about it. It gives people time to make a soft landing. The various BRACs are another example of a way to reduce the size of unneeded Government.dbackjon wrote:So who are you going to cut?Col Hogan wrote:
I could easily find 800,000 feds to put on furlough that we would not miss for one minute...in fact, I’d be thrilled if those positions were simply eliminated...
That would be surgically cutting the dole...
The problem with this shutdown is its like using a meat cleaver to perform surgery...lots of the 800,000 are critical positions, and we’re forcing them to either work unpaid or furloughing them...
And that doesn't matter thanks to the electoral college.houndawg wrote:Most Americans voted for somebody else.ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:It's why America elected him
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
I decline, I am overflowing in work, so much so my business is having problems keeping up do to my refusal to hire employees.Grizalltheway wrote:I think he should have Alphie ghostwrite it.Ibanez wrote: Also, all Trump has to do is send a post it to Congress saying, " It's all good." and he's fulfilled his constitutional duty.
"Get on the Trump train or get run the fuck over. MAGA bitches".
No he doesn't that's on the left they can end this anytime.93henfan wrote:Man, Z's list of canned auto-responses is getting weaker every day.
This shutdown is Trump's. He said it. He's said he's proud to destroy 43,000 military families, 800,000 federal families, and countless hundreds of thousands of contractor families. This is all on him. He backed himself into a corner. He has to find a way to get out.
Nope. This is the Trump shutdown and he's proud of it he said.ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:No he doesn't that's on the left they can end this anytime.93henfan wrote:Man, Z's list of canned auto-responses is getting weaker every day.
This shutdown is Trump's. He said it. He's said he's proud to destroy 43,000 military families, 800,000 federal families, and countless hundreds of thousands of contractor families. This is all on him. He backed himself into a corner. He has to find a way to get out.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Why aren't you hiring people? Think of the extra work you could take on if you had some help.ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:I decline, I am overflowing in work, so much so my business is having problems keeping up do to my refusal to hire employees.Grizalltheway wrote: I think he should have Alphie ghostwrite it.
"Get on the Trump train or get run the fuck over. MAGA bitches".
Buried in the booming Trump economy is where I have lived the entire last year plus.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Trump sure could end it. All he has to do is be a leader and step up. But we both know he has zero balls for admitting defeat and doing the right thing. This will be the downfall of his presidency.ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:No he doesn't that's on the left they can end this anytime.93henfan wrote:Man, Z's list of canned auto-responses is getting weaker every day.
This shutdown is Trump's. He said it. He's said he's proud to destroy 43,000 military families, 800,000 federal families, and countless hundreds of thousands of contractor families. This is all on him. He backed himself into a corner. He has to find a way to get out.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
93henfan wrote:Jon, I would cut my own position, honestly. But Dave's point stands here. The federal government bloat can be methodically reduced in a smart way. Using federal employees as political pawns is not the way to go. Early retirement offers and RIFs are the smarter way to go about it. It gives people time to make a soft landing. The various BRACs are another example of a way to reduce the size of unneeded Government.dbackjon wrote:
So who are you going to cut?
First time i met you you were wearing a Barack Hussein T-shirt. Little did you know how much he would do for your economic health!ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:I decline, I am overflowing in work, so much so my business is having problems keeping up do to my refusal to hire employees.Grizalltheway wrote: I think he should have Alphie ghostwrite it.
"Get on the Trump train or get run the fuck over. MAGA bitches".
Buried in the booming Trump economy is where I have lived the entire last year plus.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
It's all pomp and circumstance anyway. Let Trump tweet out the STOU and be done with it.93henfan wrote:Awesome.
Oh my, what happened to "I offered people such and such an hour and they won't take it"?ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:I decline, I am overflowing in work, so much so my business is having problems keeping up do to my refusal to hire employees.Grizalltheway wrote: I think he should have Alphie ghostwrite it.
"Get on the Trump train or get run the fuck over. MAGA bitches".
Buried in the booming Trump economy is where I have lived the entire last year plus.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Grizalltheway wrote:Oh my, what happened to "I offered people such and such an hour and they won't take it"?ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:I decline, I am overflowing in work, so much so my business is having problems keeping up do to my refusal to hire employees.
Buried in the booming Trump economy is where I have lived the entire last year plus.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
You lie like it's a bodily function.
