US Federal Government Shutdown Thread

[easilyscan 985]

37 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

My lord. She destroyed that stuck up kunt reporter and the whole fockin Democratic Party. 

She sure did!

In a case like this, I always wonder if the reporter is really ignorant enough not to know these things are going on, or if she knows they are, but is just showboating for the low information voters in her party, who will believe the act ?

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,477]

5 hours ago, easilyscan said:

https://rumble.com/v6ztnlw-karoline-leavitt-turns-tables-on-reporter-about-illegal-immigrants-medicaid.html

Shredded. But Tim will be in here to tell you they don’t want it healthcare for illegals 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,882]

20 minutes ago, easilyscan said:

She sure did!

In a case like this, I always wonder if the reporter is really ignorant enough not to know these things are going on, or if she knows they are, but is just showboating for the low information voters in her party, who will believe the act ?

 

Oh she’s putting on a show. For her overlords and the gutter/ real tims out there. 

[TimHauck 3,209]

44 minutes ago, nobody said:

Seems obvious.  Weird that people don't get it, but I guess The Party hasn't spoonfed that to the wokies.

But again, doesn’t this just go back to the discussion of the fact that the illegals will still get the care, it’s just that the hospitals won’t get reimbursed for it?  I believe you and @jonnyutah said you didn't claim otherwise, but I think it’s worth discussing. Would the right want illegals to get denied emergency care?  I honestly don’t know (in b4 a quip about lefties saying unvaccinated people should have been turned away during Covid), but if they don’t want that to be denied, wouldn’t federal funding be the best solution?   Otherwise it would probably just mean higher prices for everyone else to make up for it, or if the dollar figure is as high as Leavitt is making it out to be, maybe contribute to hospitals closing.

[The Real timschochet 7,236]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

My lord. She destroyed that stuck up kunt reporter and the whole fockin Democratic Party. Well done M’am. Well done! 

I’m sure many MAGA types like you think this. The rest of us (liberals, independents. Moderate conservatives, in other words the majority) think her answer was, as usual, shameful and ridiculous: 

She is easily the biggest embarrassment in the history of her job. 

[Ray_T 775]

On 9/30/2025 at 4:36 AM, Ron_Artest said:

Republicans own the house, the Senate, and the white house.

Govt shutdown?  Democrats fault

 

as a Canadian I find this confusing.  Maybe I'm not fully understanding the US system.......if the Republicans have a majority in both houses is it not them who decides whether there is a shutdown or not?     if this is the case, how can you be blaming the Democrats?   They dont have the votes to force a shutdown unless some republicans cross the floor.   Even then Quite a few would need to cross the floor to make this happen.     is that not correct?

maybe there is something in US politics I'm not understanding so if there is, someone let me know.

it seems really odd given this situation (republican Majority)  that people are blaming the Democrats.    I would think that the republicans are choosing to do this deliberately, or they are fighting among themselves and some are colluding with the democrats to force a shutdown.

either way, if looking at the vote count,  which members of the government voted for the shutdown.    that should tell you who to blame should it not?

[Hardcore troubadour 15,882]

13 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’m sure many MAGA types like you think this. The rest of us (liberals, independents. Moderate conservatives, in other words the majority) think her answer was, as usual, shameful and ridiculous: 

She is easily the biggest embarrassment in the history of her job. 

What would you say is the most ridiculous thing she said, off the top of your head? 

[Strike 5,909]

5 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

as a Canadian I find this confusing.  Maybe I'm not fully understanding the US system.......if the Republicans have a majority in both houses is it not them who decides whether there is a shutdown or not?     if this is the case, how can you be blaming the Democrats?   They dont have the votes to force a shutdown unless some republicans cross the floor.   Even then Quite a few would need to cross the floor to make this happen.     is that not correct?

maybe there is something in US politics I'm not understanding so if there is, someone let me know.

it seems really odd given this situation (republican Majority)  that people are blaming the Democrats.    I would think that the republicans are choosing to do this deliberately, or they are fighting among themselves and some are colluding with the democrats to force a shutdown.

either way, if looking at the vote count,  which members of the government voted for the shutdown.    that should tell you who to blame should it not?

You don't vote for a shutdown.  The budget expires.  If you don't pass a new one the government shuts down.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,882]

5 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

as a Canadian I find this confusing.  Maybe I'm not fully understanding the US system.......if the Republicans have a majority in both houses is it not them who decides whether there is a shutdown or not?     if this is the case, how can you be blaming the Democrats?   They dont have the votes to force a shutdown unless some republicans cross the floor.   Even then Quite a few would need to cross the floor to make this happen.     is that not correct?

maybe there is something in US politics I'm not understanding so if there is, someone let me know.

it seems really odd given this situation (republican Majority)  that people are blaming the Democrats.    I would think that the republicans are choosing to do this deliberately, or they are fighting among themselves and some are colluding with the democrats to force a shutdown.

either way, if looking at the vote count,  which members of the government voted for the shutdown.    that should tell you who to blame should it not?

[Ray_T 775]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

You don't vote for a shutdown.  The budget expires.  If you don't pass a new one the government shuts down.

so shouldnt the Republicans (who have a majority) be able to vote on a new one then?   This seems rather idiotic.

Like I said, maybe my understanding of the US political system is impairing my understanding of this situation.  but as an outsider some of the arguments here seem very counter intuitive and go completely against all logic and reason.

[Ron_Artest 2,014]

56 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Oh she’s putting on a show. For her overlords and the gutter/ real tims out there. 

Didn't watch the video but her job is professional liar so I'm sure it was all BS

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,882]

3 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

Didn't watch the video but her job is professional liar so I'm sure it was all BS

 

Peppermint Patty and sideshow Shanell were the purveyors of truth.

[Ron_Artest 2,014]

23 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

so shouldnt the Republicans (who have a majority) be able to vote on a new one then?   This seems rather idiotic.

Like I said, maybe my understanding of the US political system is impairing my understanding of this situation.  but as an outsider some of the arguments here seem very counter intuitive and go completely against all logic and reason.

No you're correct.  Republicans want a shutdown as much as Democrats 

[jonnyutah 505]

1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

so shouldnt the Republicans (who have a majority) be able to vote on a new one then?   This seems rather idiotic.

Like I said, maybe my understanding of the US political system is impairing my understanding of this situation.  but as an outsider some of the arguments here seem very counter intuitive and go completely against all logic and reason.

You need 60 votes in the senate. 

 

[jonnyutah 505]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

But again, doesn’t this just go back to the discussion of the fact that the illegals will still get the care, it’s just that the hospitals won’t get reimbursed for it?  I believe you and @jonnyutah said you didn't claim otherwise, but I think it’s worth discussing. Would the right want illegals to get denied emergency care?  I honestly don’t know (in b4 a quip about lefties saying unvaccinated people should have been turned away during Covid), but if they don’t want that to be denied, wouldn’t federal funding be the best solution?   Otherwise it would probably just mean higher prices for everyone else to make up for it, or if the dollar figure is as high as Leavitt is making it out to be, maybe contribute to hospitals closing.

The states will feel the brunt of it. 

If you allow more illegals to hide and provide sanctuary, your state will spend more on illegals and their healthcare. 

Maybe after enough spending, those states will cooperate with the federal govt. 

 

[Voltaire 5,425]

1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

so shouldnt the Republicans (who have a majority) be able to vote on a new one then?   This seems rather idiotic.

Like I said, maybe my understanding of the US political system is impairing my understanding of this situation.  but as an outsider some of the arguments here seem very counter intuitive and go completely against all logic and reason.

This vote doesn't require a strict majority in the Senate, where rules requires 60 votes out of 100. The Democrats can block it since the GOP only has 53 members.

[Ray_T 775]

1 hour ago, jonnyutah said:

You need 60 votes in the senate. 

 

ok I assumed you just needed a majority.

That was what the media was all about when they said they had gained the majority.     In Canada if you have a majority, you can more or less do what you want as a government.  with Less than a majority, the ruling party has to cooperate with at another party that would give them more than 50% of the seats in order to pass legislation.   I assumed this was the case in the US as well.   I guess that would explain why this made no sense to me.    Thank you for clearing this up.   but at the same time, why on earth would they make 60% the rule?   that would make it next to impossible for a government to get anything done.

 

either way, not my circus and not my clowns.   at least I understand it a little better now.

 

Thank you for that.

[Strike 5,909]

4 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

ok I assumed you just needed a majority.

That was what the media was all about when they said they had gained the majority.     In Canada if you have a majority, you can more or less do what you want as a government.  with Less than a majority, the ruling party has to cooperate with at another party that would give them more than 50% of the seats in order to pass legislation.   I assumed this was the case in the US as well.   I guess that would explain why this made no sense to me.    Thank you for clearing this up.   but at the same time, why on earth would they make 60% the rule?   that would make it next to impossible for a government to get anything done.

 

either way, not my circus and not my clowns.   at least I understand it a little better now.

 

Thank you for that.

Our forefathers wanted to make sure for important things there was a more significant majority to ensure people worked together.  And traditionally that hasn't been that much of an issue.  In THIS particular case, the Republicans have offered something called a "Continuing Resolution" which is basically a short term extension of the current terms.  ZERO changes.  For one month to allow for further negotiations.  And the Democrats have rejected that offer, which is why you're hearing people blaming them for this shutdown.

[Ray_T 775]

7 minutes ago, Strike said:

Our forefathers wanted to make sure for important things there was a more significant majority to ensure people worked together.  And traditionally that hasn't been that much of an issue.  In THIS particular case, the Republicans have offered something called a "Continuing Resolution" which is basically a short term extension of the current terms.  ZERO changes.  For one month to allow for further negotiations.  And the Democrats have rejected that offer, which is why you're hearing people blaming them for this shutdown.

 

Blame or no blame, it sounds like both parties have to agree to play nice in the sandbox.

but I kind of get the impression that Trump likes to strongarm people into doing what HE wants  even when he could probably get it by just asking nicely.

so I get why the animosity is there.     in some cases its not what hes doing that makes everyone mad.   Its how he is doing it as well.

at least... from an outsiders perspective, thats how it looks.    and clearly the Democrats are not going to give Trump a blank Check to do whatever he wants in whatever manner he chooses, so I suspect they are asking for certain things to be written into the legislation that Trump (or the republicans) dont like.

at some point both sides will have to soften their stance on this but it may take some time.    it sounds to me like neither side wants to give in. 

Thats bad news.

you know who pays for that?   You guys.

either way, I've said more than enough.   Probably said too much.   Hopefully they get this sorted.  with no government services things will get bad soon enough.

[Strike 5,909]

1 minute ago, Ray_T said:

 

Blame or no blame, it sounds like both parties have to agree to play nice in the sandbox.

but I kind of get the impression that Trump likes to strongarm people into doing what HE wants  even when he could probably get it by just asking nicely.

so I get why the animosity is there.     in some cases its not what hes doing that makes everyone mad.   Its how he is doing it as well.

at least... from an outsiders perspective, thats how it looks.    and clearly the Democrats are not going to give Trump a blank Check to do whatever he wants in whatever manner he chooses, so I suspect they are asking for certain things to be written into the legislation that Trump (or the republicans) dont like.

at some point both sides will have to soften their stance on this but it may take some time.    it sounds to me like neither side wants to give in. 

Thats bad news.

you know who pays for that?   You guys.

either way, I've said more than enough.   Probably said too much.   Hopefully they get this sorted.  with no government services things will get bad soon enough.

it's like you didn't even read my post.  LOL.  Ok.