Gamblers Made $270,000 Betting That Trump Would Lie a Bunch in His Address
"We knew we were in trouble early with this one," a bookmaker said.
An online gambling house called BookMaker took bets on how many "false statements" Trump would make in his eight-minute speech, with the over-under set at 3.5. BookMaker's odds consultant, John Lester, told the New York Daily News that the site intentionally avoided calling them "lies," so it wouldn't have to "prove that the President is intentionally misleading the public."
According to Lester, the site had pulled in "over $100,000 in action on this wager in the first twelve hours alone," and it sounds like the people who bet on Trump's, uh, tenuous relationship with the truth made some serious cash.
It was fun/enlightening hearing NPR's news blurb about the meeting today. It basically was one line each. Schumer saying the President asking for the wall to open the gov't, dems say no, Trump walks out. Then, Pence said the President would agree to open the gov't if he was given the wall "very soon," dems say no, Trump says they have nothing to discuss and walks out.
It's going to be VERY difficult for Republicans to spin this temper tantrum.
They already have.
In their version, it was the Dems having the tantrum, unwilling to hear Trump's perfectly reasonable deal of giving him everything he wants with nothing in return, and why would the president sit there and negotiate when they were unwilling to concede on this small detail?
+15
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The problem continues to be that Trump won’t back down without something to save face, but he’s made the issue so black and white that Democrats can’t morally or politically give him anything.
The problem continues to be that Trump won’t back down without something to save face, but he’s made the issue so black and white that Democrats can’t morally or politically give him anything.
There should be no face saving anyway. He shut down the government. He did so before the Democrats even took over the House. He broke it, he can fix it, and nobody needs to buy him ice cream while it’s still broken.
The only thing Democrat’s should offer is “we are willing to *discuss* funding for the wall once government is open.” Of course it’ll be a discussion in the way Republicans have offered discussion in the past...it isn’t going to happen. But that’s the biggest fig leaf that should be offered for him to walk out of this train wreck he unilaterally created.
It’s not much, but from what I hear it should suffice.
It was fun/enlightening hearing NPR's news blurb about the meeting today. It basically was one line each. Schumer saying the President asking for the wall to open the gov't, dems say no, Trump walks out. Then, Pence said the President would agree to open the gov't if he was given the wall "very soon," dems say no, Trump says they have nothing to discuss and walks out.
It's going to be VERY difficult for Republicans to spin this temper tantrum.
They already have.
In their version, it was the Dems having the tantrum, unwilling to hear Trump's perfectly reasonable deal of giving him everything he wants with nothing in return, and why would the president sit there and negotiate when they were unwilling to concede on this small detail?
I mean, the Pubs' position has long been, "Why don't you agree with the reasonable position of capitulating completely and utterly to us and our positions?"
I think what we'll eventually see, as GOP members see how badly this is going for them and put pressure on Trump, is that he will do the following:
1. Declare HE is magnanimously re-opening the government because HE wants to keep the country running smoothly instead of falling apart like the Dems want, and because he doesn't even need Congress to build his super cool wall anyway.
2. State that he MAY or IS GOING TO SOME TIME SOON declare a state of emergency so he can build the wall that way, STAY TUNED for future wall!
3. Never do anything else re: the wall, or go to DOD to try to do it and have them stymie him/slow walk the request until he moves on to the next shiny object
If he can take credit for solving the problem (that he alone caused but shh) and also declare that he doesn't even need Congress anyway so nyah nyah that's like, the best I can come up with on how he can delude himself into thinking he won this thing.
Basically "I DID IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOT BECAUSE YOU TOLD ME TO" and maybe some people can start getting their paychecks again
The problem continues to be that Trump won’t back down without something to save face, but he’s made the issue so black and white that Democrats can’t morally or politically give him anything.
It would seem that "having a functioning government" is viewed as a concession.
That could be a problem when the debt ceiling comes up again.
The problem continues to be that Trump won’t back down without something to save face, but he’s made the issue so black and white that Democrats can’t morally or politically give him anything.
It would seem that "having a functioning government" is viewed as a concession.
That could be a problem when the debt ceiling comes up again.
Fortunately on that last point the House has added "passing funding raises the debt ceiling accordingly" to it's rules.
The problem continues to be that Trump won’t back down without something to save face, but he’s made the issue so black and white that Democrats can’t morally or politically give him anything.
It would seem that "having a functioning government" is viewed as a concession.
That could be a problem when the debt ceiling comes up again.
House Dems are returning to raising he debt ceiling with budget bills. Which used to always be the case before Gingrich.
If Kushner brings the same kind of vim and vip to this conflict as he did his business, or negotiating peace in the middle east, solving the opiod crisis, diplomacy with Mexico, diplomacy with China, reforming veteran care, and reforming the criminal justice system, I'm sure this'll go swimmingly.
I really hope Senate Republicans tell him to fuck off that he's trying to tell them what to do on behalf of Daddy Trump, but the enormous egos of Senators pales compared to their craven supplication to Trumpism.
If Jared is your solution, then you're pretty much fucked.
+21
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I think what we'll eventually see, as GOP members see how badly this is going for them and put pressure on Trump, is that he will do the following:
1. Declare HE is magnanimously re-opening the government because HE wants to keep the country running smoothly instead of falling apart like the Dems want, and because he doesn't even need Congress to build his super cool wall anyway.
2. State that he MAY or IS GOING TO SOME TIME SOON declare a state of emergency so he can build the wall that way, STAY TUNED for future wall!
3. Never do anything else re: the wall, or go to DOD to try to do it and have them stymie him/slow walk the request until he moves on to the next shiny object
If he can take credit for solving the problem (that he alone caused but shh) and also declare that he doesn't even need Congress anyway so nyah nyah that's like, the best I can come up with on how he can delude himself into thinking he won this thing.
Basically "I DID IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOT BECAUSE YOU TOLD ME TO" and maybe some people can start getting their paychecks again
We'll see how long it takes to get to this point
He's been pretty mouthy this week about doing things he didn't want to but his advisors said he should, like the meeting today and the statement last night. I don't know how to reconcile all of this together. He seems very intent on keeping the government shut down on his move and doesn't want to make any sort of gesture or extension or negotiation to re-open it.
Brian Schatz is a Democratic Senator from Hawai'i.
It’s a nice gesture but I really don’t understand why a special class of workers gets protection from hardship over others? Additionally, why are creditors punished for government shutdown?
1) Because they are getting fucked for no good reason by random act of Republican. They are a special class of worker in that they are people who should be being paid but aren't because bullshit. They have jobs. They just literally can't work them. They are being denied pay by the federal government. The least the government can do is try and ease the hardship they themselves are inflicting on these people.
2) Because it's fantastic optics. This is exactly what the Dems need to be doing. Rub the unpopularity of this whole farce in the Republicans face every chance they get. Jam these motherfuckers at every turn.
I think what we'll eventually see, as GOP members see how badly this is going for them and put pressure on Trump, is that he will do the following:
1. Declare HE is magnanimously re-opening the government because HE wants to keep the country running smoothly instead of falling apart like the Dems want, and because he doesn't even need Congress to build his super cool wall anyway.
2. State that he MAY or IS GOING TO SOME TIME SOON declare a state of emergency so he can build the wall that way, STAY TUNED for future wall!
3. Never do anything else re: the wall, or go to DOD to try to do it and have them stymie him/slow walk the request until he moves on to the next shiny object
If he can take credit for solving the problem (that he alone caused but shh) and also declare that he doesn't even need Congress anyway so nyah nyah that's like, the best I can come up with on how he can delude himself into thinking he won this thing.
Basically "I DID IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOT BECAUSE YOU TOLD ME TO" and maybe some people can start getting their paychecks again
We'll see how long it takes to get to this point
I doubt the Democrats let him get away with doing that without jabbing him over and over again though. Pelosi is trolling the fuck out of him already in the best way and he's not gonna be able to take that from a woman. So if he even goes through with it he might explode again right afterwards and do something incredibly stupid.
I suppose the big question is, is THIS going to be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back? Is this hill he's picking to die on going to be the one?
I think what we'll eventually see, as GOP members see how badly this is going for them and put pressure on Trump, is that he will do the following:
1. Declare HE is magnanimously re-opening the government because HE wants to keep the country running smoothly instead of falling apart like the Dems want, and because he doesn't even need Congress to build his super cool wall anyway.
2. State that he MAY or IS GOING TO SOME TIME SOON declare a state of emergency so he can build the wall that way, STAY TUNED for future wall!
3. Never do anything else re: the wall, or go to DOD to try to do it and have them stymie him/slow walk the request until he moves on to the next shiny object
If he can take credit for solving the problem (that he alone caused but shh) and also declare that he doesn't even need Congress anyway so nyah nyah that's like, the best I can come up with on how he can delude himself into thinking he won this thing.
Basically "I DID IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOT BECAUSE YOU TOLD ME TO" and maybe some people can start getting their paychecks again
We'll see how long it takes to get to this point
I doubt the Democrats let him get away with doing that without jabbing him over and over again though. Pelosi is trolling the fuck out of him already in the best way and he's not gonna be able to take that from a woman. So if he even goes through with it he might explode again right afterwards and do something incredibly stupid.
I mean, yes it will be a huge albatross around his neck in the future despite his own personal spin on it
But I'm just speculating on how his ego is gonna triangulate itself to a "win" here
This whole mess is even crazier when you read those stories about how the wall was just a mnemonic device for him to talk about immigration.
The government is about to be shut down for the longest length ever because some campaign advisors were trying to keep trump on message. What a world.
I can agree to this. Especially since he was asked about transparency on the wall process and responded that you of course have to be able to see what's on the other side of the wall.
Introducing bills that normalize Federal employees being unpaid makes me uncomfortable, even if it's kabuki.
I don't like that posture. I'd rather see them introducing politically-motivated bills that force snap elections in the event of shutdowns or cause Congress to lose their pay and benefits.
Its just so disingenous and smarmy and normalizing even though I agree with the sentiment that this shouldn't happen.
I like the idea of snap elections in theory but I don’t know how you design a system that doesn’t lead to out of power parties intentionally tanking budget bills to force presidential elections.
Introducing bills that normalize Federal employees being unpaid makes me uncomfortable, even if it's kabuki.
I don't like that posture. I'd rather see them introducing politically-motivated bills that force snap elections in the event of shutdowns or cause Congress to lose their pay and benefits.
Its just so disingenous and smarmy and normalizing even though I agree with the sentiment that this shouldn't happen.
I like the idea of snap elections in theory but I don’t know how you design a system that doesn’t lead to out of power parties intentionally tanking budget bills to force presidential elections.
That would only be a problem is you have an incoherent government, since the minority cannot tank the budget.
Introducing bills that normalize Federal employees being unpaid makes me uncomfortable, even if it's kabuki.
I don't like that posture. I'd rather see them introducing politically-motivated bills that force snap elections in the event of shutdowns or cause Congress to lose their pay and benefits.
Its just so disingenous and smarmy and normalizing even though I agree with the sentiment that this shouldn't happen.
I like the idea of snap elections in theory but I don’t know how you design a system that doesn’t lead to out of power parties intentionally tanking budget bills to force presidential elections.
That would only be a problem is you have an incoherent government, since the minority cannot tank the budget.
Take the current situation though. Dems have a minority in the senate due to the senate map and the presidency isn’t up for election but they are probably ahead nationally in public opinion. They would have a huge motivation to just tank the first budget that comes up and get a presidential election and possibly the senate in a snap.
The problem is you need unanimous consent from all three bodies (house, senate, president) to pass a budget and those bodies can be controlled by different parties, who might consider it worth risking a loss if they only control one house of congress if they could have a chance at taking the other house or presidency.
Introducing bills that normalize Federal employees being unpaid makes me uncomfortable, even if it's kabuki.
I don't like that posture. I'd rather see them introducing politically-motivated bills that force snap elections in the event of shutdowns or cause Congress to lose their pay and benefits.
Its just so disingenous and smarmy and normalizing even though I agree with the sentiment that this shouldn't happen.
I like the idea of snap elections in theory but I don’t know how you design a system that doesn’t lead to out of power parties intentionally tanking budget bills to force presidential elections.
That would only be a problem is you have an incoherent government, since the minority cannot tank the budget.
Take the current situation though. Dems have a minority in the senate due to the senate map and the presidency isn’t up for election but they are probably ahead nationally in public opinion. They would have a huge motivation to just tank the first budget that comes up and get a presidential election and possibly the senate in a snap.
The problem is you need unanimous consent from all three bodies (house, senate, president) to pass a budget and those bodies can be controlled by different parties, who might consider it worth risking a loss if they only control one house of congress if they could have a chance at taking the other house or presidency.
Yes, so only if you have an incoherent government.
+3
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
What would be hilarious is if Congress passes bills to piecemeal-fund every part of the fed except ICE.
And then Trump agrees to reopen the government and the Dems are just "Nah, we're good.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
What would be hilarious is if Congress passes bills to piecemeal-fund every part of the fed except ICE.
And then Trump agrees to reopen the government and the Dems are just "Nah, we're good.
Well that is one of their proposals. Piecemeal fund the government for the fiscal year, minus the DHS. I dunno if it was already taken to the floor or not.
I heard about this and figured they would be sketchy on what they considered a lie. Really hard line it, but besides rhat, ya thought it was low and wanted to bet on it.
As for Senate, the republicans to probably watch for when the damn breaks on McConnell and Trump.
-Gardner (CO) & Collins (ME): Both are from states won by Clinton. If they want to keep their jobs they can't exactly let this keep going.
-Murkowski (AL): Yes, she's a republican, but she does seem to actually make an attempt to do what's best for her voters and last I check this is rather harmful to them.
-Perdue (GA), Thom (NC), Ernst (IA) & McSally (AZ): I'd argue that none of these four are in republican stronghold state and if they want to stick around, they'll want this shut down to end sooner rather than later.
-Cornyn (TX): Not at as much risk as the above four, but I'd say things in Texas are as such that he decides it's not in his best interest to tempt fate.
-Romney (UT) & Lee (UT): Last I checked Mormons didn't really care for Trump. Outside of democrats or the republicans that are retiring. This is the one group of people that don't really have to give a shit about playing nice with --Trump because their voters won't ditched for telling Trump to eat shit. Sure both have shown a lack of spine in the past, but this shit show might result in them find it.
-Alexander (TN) & Roberts (KS): Both are retiring, so they can tell Trump to shove it with little worry.
Throw in the fact that Cornyn has said he felt this was stupid and that Capito (WV) has already made noise about liking this. Capito is kind of a big deal because West Virginia is Trump country and that doesn't bode well for what Trump wants.
My money is on the GOP folding pretty soon. I'm not even looking into which states are getting majorly fucked by Trump's bullshit shutdown and I know those tend to be on the republican side. Plus, no one is going to be happy about the tax return thing; especially, when they find out this admin lied about how this shit show won't impact it. Also going to get harder with the House sent up stuff in piecemeal and the fact that they voted for funding this stuff in the Senate before Trump's tantrum.
Edit: Before I forget. Nice of Trump to pretty much invoke NIMBY-ism for his shitty wall. Surprised people haven't really hit on how "rich people live in gated communities," is essentially NIMBY-ism and that tends not to go over well with many; especially, when it shitty rich folk invoking it. Also not going to be surprised when we get a wave of people sneaking into gated communities and leaving behind messages about how wrong Trump is.
What happens to all the caged immigrants during the shutdown though?
The Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S. Code § 1341) prevents any officer or employee of the United States from making an expenditure or obligation without an appropriation (e.g. you're not allowed to spend more than you're given). This has the historical basis in some jerks spending all their appropriations and then demanding more to keep functioning, so now it's a crime to spend more than you're allotted.
The ADA also prevents higher-ups in agencies from paying people. That's coupled with 31 U.S. Code § 1342, which basically prevents people from voluntarily working for the government. This is where essential employees come in. They are the people whose job involves the safety of human life or the protection of property. They get the awesome benefit of being allowed to keep working without pay.
DHS employees get to monitor our borders, including ICE agents (16,324 essential out of 20,052 employees) watching detainees. The treasury attempts to keep some IRS officers onboard handling critical resources (and some fee-based ones, which probably help supplement a lack of appropriations). And basically all DOJ employees (95,339 essential out of 113,546 employees) get to keep working to provide some semblance of still-slowly-functioning legal system. All for free! (Although they'll nominally be reimbursed after the funding for the agencies is restored. In the past, the furloughed employees not permitted by law to work also have been given pay for their furloughed period.) But portions of these departments do have some other appropriations and alternative funding, so not all of those employees are without a paycheck just yet.
So the current state of affairs isn't truly a shutdown yet (for the unfunded agencies). A few weeks without pay will probably lead to a loss of several "essential" employees as they leave to find some means of maintaining their livelihood. The prohibition on spending also means the agencies technically don't get to buy anything but barebones support equipment either (from batteries to batons).
The "caged immigrants" are probably being watched by people who aren't being paid and who don't have the means to buy most things they might need to do their job properly.
What happens to all the caged immigrants during the shutdown though?
The Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S. Code § 1341) prevents any officer or employee of the United States from making an expenditure or obligation without an appropriation (e.g. you're not allowed to spend more than you're given). This has the historical basis in some jerks spending all their appropriations and then demanding more to keep functioning, so now it's a crime to spend more than you're allotted.
The ADA also prevents higher-ups in agencies from paying people. That's coupled with 31 U.S. Code § 1342, which basically prevents people from voluntarily working for the government. This is where essential employees come in. They are the people whose job involves the safety of human life or the protection of property. They get the awesome benefit of being allowed to keep working without pay.
DHS employees get to monitor our borders, including ICE agents (16,324 essential out of 20,052 employees) watching detainees. The treasury attempts to keep some IRS officers onboard handling critical resources (and some fee-based ones, which probably help supplement a lack of appropriations). And basically all DOJ employees (95,339 essential out of 113,546 employees) get to keep working to provide some semblance of still-slowly-functioning legal system. All for free! (Although they'll nominally be reimbursed after the funding for the agencies is restored. In the past, the furloughed employees not permitted by law to work also have been given pay for their furloughed period.) But portions of these departments do have some other appropriations and alternative funding, so not all of those employees are without a paycheck just yet.
So the current state of affairs isn't truly a shutdown yet (for the unfunded agencies). A few weeks without pay will probably lead to a loss of several "essential" employees as they leave to find some means of maintaining their livelihood. The prohibition on spending also means the agencies technically don't get to buy anything but barebones support equipment either (from batteries to batons).
The "caged immigrants" are probably being watched by people who aren't being paid and who don't have the means to buy most things they might need to do their job properly.
Batteries and batons are nothing, I'm more concerned about whether they're allowed to buy food.
(CNN) — Staring at a prolonged government shutdown, Republican senators are privately planning to court Democratic senators on an immigration deal that would give President Donald Trump money for his border wall and include several measures long-sought by Democrats, according to sources familiar with the matter.
After Trump stormed out of a White House meeting with congressional leaders, GOP senators privately gathered in Sen. Lindsey Graham's office Wednesday to discuss a way out of the logjam. The long-shot idea: propose an immigration deal that would include $5.7 billion for Trump's border wall along with several provisions that could entice Democrats.
Those items include changes to help those who are a part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as well as immigrants from El Salvador and other countries impacted by the Temporary Protected Status program - along with modifications to H-2B visas.
Posts
Yeah they should fire John Lester
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
They already have.
In their version, it was the Dems having the tantrum, unwilling to hear Trump's perfectly reasonable deal of giving him everything he wants with nothing in return, and why would the president sit there and negotiate when they were unwilling to concede on this small detail?
There should be no face saving anyway. He shut down the government. He did so before the Democrats even took over the House. He broke it, he can fix it, and nobody needs to buy him ice cream while it’s still broken.
The only thing Democrat’s should offer is “we are willing to *discuss* funding for the wall once government is open.” Of course it’ll be a discussion in the way Republicans have offered discussion in the past...it isn’t going to happen. But that’s the biggest fig leaf that should be offered for him to walk out of this train wreck he unilaterally created.
It’s not much, but from what I hear it should suffice.
@DarkPrimus even if credited correctly, a tweet by itself is not enough substance for a post in this thread. Provide context please.
I mean, the Pubs' position has long been, "Why don't you agree with the reasonable position of capitulating completely and utterly to us and our positions?"
Edit: not that a dismissive “bye bye” is that unique, but I swear I can hear it in his voice.
1. Declare HE is magnanimously re-opening the government because HE wants to keep the country running smoothly instead of falling apart like the Dems want, and because he doesn't even need Congress to build his super cool wall anyway.
2. State that he MAY or IS GOING TO SOME TIME SOON declare a state of emergency so he can build the wall that way, STAY TUNED for future wall!
3. Never do anything else re: the wall, or go to DOD to try to do it and have them stymie him/slow walk the request until he moves on to the next shiny object
If he can take credit for solving the problem (that he alone caused but shh) and also declare that he doesn't even need Congress anyway so nyah nyah that's like, the best I can come up with on how he can delude himself into thinking he won this thing.
Basically "I DID IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOT BECAUSE YOU TOLD ME TO" and maybe some people can start getting their paychecks again
We'll see how long it takes to get to this point
It would seem that "having a functioning government" is viewed as a concession.
That could be a problem when the debt ceiling comes up again.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Fortunately on that last point the House has added "passing funding raises the debt ceiling accordingly" to it's rules.
House Dems are returning to raising he debt ceiling with budget bills. Which used to always be the case before Gingrich.
Burgess Everett is a Politico reporter.
If Kushner brings the same kind of vim and vip to this conflict as he did his business, or negotiating peace in the middle east, solving the opiod crisis, diplomacy with Mexico, diplomacy with China, reforming veteran care, and reforming the criminal justice system, I'm sure this'll go swimmingly.
I really hope Senate Republicans tell him to fuck off that he's trying to tell them what to do on behalf of Daddy Trump, but the enormous egos of Senators pales compared to their craven supplication to Trumpism.
If Jared is your solution, then you're pretty much fucked.
1) Because they are getting fucked for no good reason by random act of Republican. They are a special class of worker in that they are people who should be being paid but aren't because bullshit. They have jobs. They just literally can't work them. They are being denied pay by the federal government. The least the government can do is try and ease the hardship they themselves are inflicting on these people.
2) Because it's fantastic optics. This is exactly what the Dems need to be doing. Rub the unpopularity of this whole farce in the Republicans face every chance they get. Jam these motherfuckers at every turn.
He fucking sucks so this is something
(Paul Ryan you were the worst)
I doubt the Democrats let him get away with doing that without jabbing him over and over again though. Pelosi is trolling the fuck out of him already in the best way and he's not gonna be able to take that from a woman. So if he even goes through with it he might explode again right afterwards and do something incredibly stupid.
I mean, yes it will be a huge albatross around his neck in the future despite his own personal spin on it
But I'm just speculating on how his ego is gonna triangulate itself to a "win" here
I'm officially too cynical, as I see that and think "Boy, they sure want their refunds."
Be slightly less cynical imo. They want their voters to get their refunds.
The government is about to be shut down for the longest length ever because some campaign advisors were trying to keep trump on message. What a world.
Need 49 more to get to 2/3rds.
I like the idea of snap elections in theory but I don’t know how you design a system that doesn’t lead to out of power parties intentionally tanking budget bills to force presidential elections.
Take the current situation though. Dems have a minority in the senate due to the senate map and the presidency isn’t up for election but they are probably ahead nationally in public opinion. They would have a huge motivation to just tank the first budget that comes up and get a presidential election and possibly the senate in a snap.
The problem is you need unanimous consent from all three bodies (house, senate, president) to pass a budget and those bodies can be controlled by different parties, who might consider it worth risking a loss if they only control one house of congress if they could have a chance at taking the other house or presidency.
You would need to amend the Constitution, and have Congress folk lay their careers on the line, so I don't see it happening
And then Trump agrees to reopen the government and the Dems are just "Nah, we're good.
I heard about this and figured they would be sketchy on what they considered a lie. Really hard line it, but besides rhat, ya thought it was low and wanted to bet on it.
-Gardner (CO) & Collins (ME): Both are from states won by Clinton. If they want to keep their jobs they can't exactly let this keep going.
-Murkowski (AL): Yes, she's a republican, but she does seem to actually make an attempt to do what's best for her voters and last I check this is rather harmful to them.
-Perdue (GA), Thom (NC), Ernst (IA) & McSally (AZ): I'd argue that none of these four are in republican stronghold state and if they want to stick around, they'll want this shut down to end sooner rather than later.
-Cornyn (TX): Not at as much risk as the above four, but I'd say things in Texas are as such that he decides it's not in his best interest to tempt fate.
-Romney (UT) & Lee (UT): Last I checked Mormons didn't really care for Trump. Outside of democrats or the republicans that are retiring. This is the one group of people that don't really have to give a shit about playing nice with --Trump because their voters won't ditched for telling Trump to eat shit. Sure both have shown a lack of spine in the past, but this shit show might result in them find it.
-Alexander (TN) & Roberts (KS): Both are retiring, so they can tell Trump to shove it with little worry.
Throw in the fact that Cornyn has said he felt this was stupid and that Capito (WV) has already made noise about liking this. Capito is kind of a big deal because West Virginia is Trump country and that doesn't bode well for what Trump wants.
My money is on the GOP folding pretty soon. I'm not even looking into which states are getting majorly fucked by Trump's bullshit shutdown and I know those tend to be on the republican side. Plus, no one is going to be happy about the tax return thing; especially, when they find out this admin lied about how this shit show won't impact it. Also going to get harder with the House sent up stuff in piecemeal and the fact that they voted for funding this stuff in the Senate before Trump's tantrum.
Edit: Before I forget. Nice of Trump to pretty much invoke NIMBY-ism for his shitty wall. Surprised people haven't really hit on how "rich people live in gated communities," is essentially NIMBY-ism and that tends not to go over well with many; especially, when it shitty rich folk invoking it. Also not going to be surprised when we get a wave of people sneaking into gated communities and leaving behind messages about how wrong Trump is.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
They go from being cared for by racist guards to being cared for by racist guards that are being forced to work without pay.
The Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S. Code § 1341) prevents any officer or employee of the United States from making an expenditure or obligation without an appropriation (e.g. you're not allowed to spend more than you're given). This has the historical basis in some jerks spending all their appropriations and then demanding more to keep functioning, so now it's a crime to spend more than you're allotted.
The ADA also prevents higher-ups in agencies from paying people. That's coupled with 31 U.S. Code § 1342, which basically prevents people from voluntarily working for the government. This is where essential employees come in. They are the people whose job involves the safety of human life or the protection of property. They get the awesome benefit of being allowed to keep working without pay.
DHS employees get to monitor our borders, including ICE agents (16,324 essential out of 20,052 employees) watching detainees. The treasury attempts to keep some IRS officers onboard handling critical resources (and some fee-based ones, which probably help supplement a lack of appropriations). And basically all DOJ employees (95,339 essential out of 113,546 employees) get to keep working to provide some semblance of still-slowly-functioning legal system. All for free! (Although they'll nominally be reimbursed after the funding for the agencies is restored. In the past, the furloughed employees not permitted by law to work also have been given pay for their furloughed period.) But portions of these departments do have some other appropriations and alternative funding, so not all of those employees are without a paycheck just yet.
So the current state of affairs isn't truly a shutdown yet (for the unfunded agencies). A few weeks without pay will probably lead to a loss of several "essential" employees as they leave to find some means of maintaining their livelihood. The prohibition on spending also means the agencies technically don't get to buy anything but barebones support equipment either (from batteries to batons).
The "caged immigrants" are probably being watched by people who aren't being paid and who don't have the means to buy most things they might need to do their job properly.
Batteries and batons are nothing, I'm more concerned about whether they're allowed to buy food.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/09/politics/immigration-deal-wall-fight-republican-senators/index.html
Turn the govt back on like you voted to do less than a month ago you twats