Shutdown Over Border Security?

[carpedm9587]

I've been tracking the impact of the shutdown on Trump's approval ratings, and I am pleased to report it is indeed having a negative effect. His aggregate disapproval rating has shifted from a low of 51.1% on 12/16/18 (a low he had not seen since 5/4/17), to his current disapproval rating of 54.9 (a high he has not seen since 3/5/18). Remember we are talking about disapproval - so high is bad, and low is good. So there is a segment of the "middle" that he is losing.

His approval rating is dropping somewhat, but Trump's "base" stands pretty firm and I doubt there is anything he can do or any discovery that can be made that will cost him that group. His aggregate approval is currently at 41.7%, down from a high of 44.7% (10/25/18). He has not seen this low since he hit 40.8 on 9/13/18. His gap is at 13.1 (negative), which is a gap he hasn't seen since last March.

Go, Trump, go! If you keep it up, maybe you can exceed your all-time high gap of -21.1%!

Wow - the Rasmussen poll just came in and they are renown for their right-leaning skew - but they have Trump underwater by 12 points. I suspect, if this shutdown continues, Trump's numbers are going to tank badly over the next couple of weeks.

[Bill the Cat]

Interesting. I consider myself "in my right mind" and I largely hold Trump responsible for the shutdown. My reasoning is fairly simple:

First, before Trump said "no" he said "yes." Indeed, the House and Senate had both signed a bill that Trump signaled he would sign to keep government open while negotiations continued. Then Trump was raked across the coals by the right-wing media pundits for "chickening out" and warned that his base would abandon him - and he changed course midstream, triggering the shutdown.

Yeah, no he didn't. Freedom Caucus members took to the House floor on Wednesday night before his decision to urge Trump not to sign the continuing resolution without his border wall money included. He listened to them.

Second, before the shutdown began, Trump explicitly said he would take pride in shutting down the government over this issue, and that he would take full responsibility and not blame anyone else. Most of us knew THAT wasn't going to happen - because Trump ALWAYS blames someone else (and I seldom use superlatives). Still - he said it.

He said that to put the onus on Chuck and Nancy to actually do the right thing, which they didn't. And to stop them from whining like little babies.

Third, Democrats have repeatedly offered to negotiate over border security (which is the umbrella issue we should all be concerned about) and Trump is locked onto "the wall."

And since the Dems can't even articulate what "border security" even means, and their version of negotiate is either 1) reward the criminals with citizenship, or 2) "No", there is little left for Trump to do.

He has painted himself into a corner, because he made "the wall" the optical representation of "security" and worked to convince his base that "we can't have security without a wall." So now - his base wants a wall. So it is Trump unwilling to negotiate - not the Dems. The Dems want an open discussion about security - and Trump wants a wall.

There is no separating the two. Hasn't been for decades. You can not have security without a physical barrier that is the primary means of deterrence. And the Dems do not want a discussion about security. They want amnesty for illegals and to kick the can of security as far down the road as they can. If they were serious, like they were for the ACA, it would have already been done.

I would allocate a bit of blame to the Republicans for not passing any bill at all - but I understand McConnell's position: it is pointless to waste the effort so long as Trump is not going to sign it. Personally, I think they should vote anyway, so we can see exactly where the Republicans in Congress stand on the issue (we know where the Dems stand). But so long as there is no vote - there is no hard-fast evidence of Republican complicity in the issue.

The House DID pass the measure with Trump's 5 Billion before the Dems took over. The Senate failed to even bring the House bill up for a vote because of RINO promises to vote against it.

So - my vote is "Trump is to blame."

And it's apparently based on ignorance and misinformation.

You can disagree with any part of that - but it doesn't make me (and others like me) "stupid" because we hold these informed and considered opinions.

They aren't informed. You hypothesized on the first without even considering the appeal the night before from the Freedom Caucus. you hyper-literalized the second rhetorical device, and just plain missed the entire history of the third. So, yes. Your blaming Trump is ignorant.

[Bill the Cat]

There's a reason why these polls never ask WHY they disapprove...

[rogue06]

Wow - the Rasmussen poll just came in and they are renown for their right-leaning skew - but they have Trump underwater by 12 points. I suspect, if this shutdown continues, Trump's numbers are going to tank badly over the next couple of weeks.

IIRC this supposed "right-leaning skew" was what made them the most accurate of the major pollsters in the 2016 election (a few of the others changed their continued prediction of a Clinton landslide to one of a closer race -- though with Hillary still winning -- at the very end when nobody was paying much attention any longer as a face-saving measure).

[Mountain Man]

There's a reason why these polls never ask WHY they disapprove...

For instance, I'm baffled why Trump waited until the Democrats controlled the House before he took a hard-line stance on the wall. Surely he would have had better luck getting the Republicans to cooperate if he had done this a year ago.

[One Bad Pig]

For instance, I'm baffled why Trump waited until the Democrats controlled the House before he took a hard-line stance on the wall. Surely he would have had better luck getting the Republicans to cooperate if he had done this a year ago.

Perhaps. This mess started because the lame-duck session of Congress wouldn't pass it before changeover.

[Bill the Cat]

For instance, I'm baffled why Trump waited until the Democrats controlled the House before he took a hard-line stance on the wall. Surely he would have had better luck getting the Republicans to cooperate if he had done this a year ago.

The RINOs refused to cooperate.

[oxmixmudd]

Again, most Americans are stupid.

No - just the small percentage willing to follow Trump into Hell itself.

Jim

[carpedm9587]

Yeah, no he didn't. Freedom Caucus members took to the House floor on Wednesday night before his decision to urge Trump not to sign the continuing resolution without his border wall money included. He listened to them.

It wasn't just the Freedom Caucus, BTC - though they were in the mix. Coulter came down on him (and he unfollowed her). Limbaugh did. The list goes on. Basically - the voices from the far right spoke. That doesn't change the fact that he said yes - then changed his mind AFTER both houses of Congress had passed a bill they expected him to sign.

He said that to put the onus on Chuck and Nancy to actually do the right thing, which they didn't. And to stop them from whining like little babies.

That's spin. BTC. He claimed to take pride in it - claimed to "take the mantle" - and vowed to shutdown government - then he pivoted from that to blame everyone else. You can't rewrite history just because you don't like the way it unfolded.

And since the Dems can't even articulate what "border security" even means, and their version of negotiate is either 1) reward the criminals with citizenship, or 2) "No", there is little left for Trump to do.

While there are voices with different messages among Dems (as there are among Reps), the message from the left is reasonably clear: border security means bringing illegal immigration under control. I'm not confused by the message. I'm not sure why you are.

There is no separating the two. Hasn't been for decades. You can not have security without a physical barrier that is the primary means of deterrence. And the Dems do not want a discussion about security. They want amnesty for illegals and to kick the can of security as far down the road as they can. If they were serious, like they were for the ACA, it would have already been done.

That's a Trump-esque fiction. Yes - a barrier can be an effect deterrence and should be constructed - where strategically relevant. No one has demonstrated that we need 700-900 miles of new wall. Trump has faild to provide one iota of justification for the construction - he just mouths platitudes over and over that appeal to his base.

The House DID pass the measure with Trump's 5 Billion before the Dems took over. The Senate failed to even bring the House bill up for a vote because of RINO promises to vote against it.

Yes - the Republican-controlled house. As they say - elections have consequences. The Dems now control the house and Trump is going to have to deal with it. Their base is as adamant that they not pour money down that rathole as Trump's base is adamant that they do. To resolve requires compromise - which (contrary to common opinion) is not a dirty word. The Dems are looking to negotiate on border security. Trump is fixed on one element of border security: the wall - and is unwilling to negotiate on it. Ergo - Trump is the hold-up.

And it's apparently based on ignorance and misinformation.

Actually - it is based on knowledge and accurate information - and a different set of priorities than you use. Labeling your political opposition "stupid" and "the enemy" and "ignorant" gets us nowhere. I don't think of you in those terms. I think we look at basic facts and arrive at different conclusions because we have different priorities - not because the facts themselves are different.

They aren't informed. You hypothesized on the first without even considering the appeal the night before from the Freedom Caucus. you hyper-literalized the second rhetorical device, and just plain missed the entire history of the third. So, yes. Your blaming Trump is ignorant.

The Freedom Caucus was just anther voice, BTC - and it is not incorrect that BOTH houses of Congress passed the legislation they believed Trump would sign. Hyper-literalized? BTC - words have meaning. "I am proud to shut down the government" may have been an ill-considered statement - but it is the statement he made. So too is "I'll own the shutdown" and "I won't blame you" and "I'll take the mantle." Trump was foolish to say any of those things - but say them he did. Taking a statement for what it means is not "hyper-literalizing." It's just taking the statement for what it means. After all - was the interpretation of "If you want to keep your doctor, you can" a "hyper-literal" interpretation? "Hyper-literal" is just a tool for being able to wave away something Trump said. If you can use that tool - then why can't the left about Obama's statements? I prefer to take a person at their word. Obama lied. Trump claimed responsibility.

And despite your objections - the third is an accurate representation of the state of affairs. Dems are willing to negotiate "border security." Trump is fixated on "the wall" - which is only one PART of border security. So the Dems are focused on the what and willing to negotiate the how. Trump is fixated on a how.

[carpedm9587]

There's a reason why these polls never ask WHY they disapprove...

What do you think that reason is...?

[carpedm9587]

IIRC this supposed "right-leaning skew" was what made them the most accurate of the major pollsters in the 2016 election (a few of the others changed their continued prediction of a Clinton landslide to one of a closer race -- though with Hillary still winning -- at the very end when nobody was paying much attention any longer as a face-saving measure).

Actually - I know of only two polls (state level) that were outside their margin of error in 2016 - so I really don't know where people get this "all the polls were wrong" thing. I'd be curious to know which polls you are referring to that were wrong. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are doing what Sparko does and confusing projected probabilities with polls.

[carpedm9587]

The RINOs refused to cooperate.

"RINO" is just shorthand for "doesn't walk in lock step with the so-called 'Freedom Caucus.' "

And has anyone else noticed how often things that actually don't reflect virtue/value get wrapped up in positive sounding names? The "Freedom Caucus" - the "Problem Solvers Caucus" - the "Patriot Act" and so forth. I mean, after all - how could anyone argue with freedom...or patriotism... or problem solving.

A rose by any other name...

[Bill the Cat]

No - just the small percentage willing to follow Trump into Hell itself.

Jim

Ooooh!! Field trip to see Hillary?

[Bill the Cat]

Actually - I know of only two polls (state level) that were outside their margin of error in 2016 - so I really don't know where people get this "all the polls were wrong" thing. I'd be curious to know which polls you are referring to that were wrong. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are doing what Sparko does and confusing projected probabilities with polls.

Adam Silver even admitted they were horribly wrong and that they needed to seriously adjust their methodology.

[Bill the Cat]

"RINO" is just shorthand for "doesn't walk in lock step with the so-called 'Freedom Caucus.' "

And has anyone else noticed how often things that actually don't reflect virtue/value get wrapped up in positive sounding names? The "Freedom Caucus" - the "Problem Solvers Caucus" - the "Patriot Act" and so forth. I mean, after all - how could anyone argue with freedom...or patriotism... or problem solving.

A rose by any other name...

You can't be that naive...