Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby
Maybe it's just a pipe dream but I'd like to believe in this age of leaks where nothing's sacred, that maybe something this critically important could stay sealed until it's time to make it public. Time will tell though.
I agree, one sided bills was a problem in the last administration too, but god forbid they decide to change something because precedent has been established. This is more of a Congress issue than a Trump thing, but still, it'd be nice to see more give-and-take on both sides instead of one side always disagreeing with the other.
|
I had hoped that once the republicans failed at the repeal that Trump would broker a grand compromise, but in my view the lefts hatred (not dislike or disdain blind HATRED) of Trump made that impossible and forced Trump to move more to my side. Fact is I know there needs to be a balance but if the left concedes nothing then I won't either.
A great example exists right in this thread. A potential win win compromise that saves DACA and funds a border wall would be a win both sides could show their constituents, but Mattys response dictates mine. Instead of acknowledging Trump has constituents and they want an effective border wall he uses ad hominem attacks against the wall and proclaims DACA should stand alone. So ok I return the response of -no wall no DACA- simple but we both lose. it doesn't have to be that way, though if the left gets past its hatred and let's Trump be the negotiator he is. He will shake Shumers hand smiling ear to ear on how great the DACA dreamers will be and how magnificent the wall will look when finished, or they can snip and spit like two kids on a recess playground.