The Senate Could Embarrass Trump Over His National Emergency

You think the non-Trumpsters don't know that the border crisis is made up?

 

Lol, the collusion hoax was made up, the record and growing number of illegals crossing the border is an undeniable FACT.

 

A fact you said ?

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-the-wall-buoying-trump-after-fleeing-in-2018

My internal numbers are now showing that even Klobuchar can't beat Trump.

Trump will be your president until 2024.

 

Lol, thanks for proving that it's been in crisis for decades.... not that your chart has any relevance to the current record high spike in illegal border crossings. It's still an undeniable fact.

 

"Even Klobuchar?" Is she some benchmark for you?

But kudos for attempting to back up your claim. Unfortunately, it is not convincing. Zogby gets a C rating from 538 and one of the reasons is that they use an online only survey and they ask for "agree/disagree" instead of "support/oppose." But even that poll showed that 59% of Americans disapproved of his emergency declaration and that 54% of Americans disapprove of Trump's job performance (which is almost identical to his current disapproval rating at both 538 and RCP). So even if the Zogby poll was not nearly one month old (and it is), there is absolutely no sign that the "improvement" (a 2 point decrease in disapproval) seen by that poll has resulted in any sort of trend.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...m-with-suburban-women/?utm_term=.5b098934ac49

 

Oooohh.. nobody wants to challenge your internal numbers..

Pack it up guys... This guy has internal numbers..

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-the-wall-buoying-trump-after-fleeing-in-2018

Of course you don't...

A significant plurality (45%) of suburban women (likely voters) do support the president looking elsewhere to find funding for the border fence, while two in five suburban women do not support this idea . The support of suburban women is well above the number of all women (32% yes/42% no) and all suburban likely voters (37% yes/42% no) who agree with President Trump utilizing funds committed elsewhere to finish 500 miles of border fencing.



When it comes to Trump's national emergency, we can see the disparity between how all voters and suburban women feel about Trump declaring a national emergency to complete 500 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.

 

The Zogby poll is nearly one month old and the 3 point increase in approval rating that they saw from the height of the shutdown to the end of the shutdown was not the start of any upward trend for trump. Also, a contemporaneous poll from NPR/Marist showed a much, much, much lower approval amongst suburban women.

 

Emergency declarations have to be veto proof majority to override the president if he feels like vetoing and he's said he would so..........

 

Do you find the precedent argument being used by most of the otherwise trump supporting senators who are about to vote against him on this bill to be persuasive?

 

And what would that argument be, that the shoe can be on the other foot? That's obviously why Congress isnt supposed to delegate powers like that in the first place.
Doesnt mean they havent and there aren't rules governing that that have to be followed.

 

Yup. It's all over.

Then, they are gonna change the Constitution and Trump will be Dictator for Life.

Bank it. Zogby's internal numbers.

Gotta be true.

 

Close, but no.

They are voting to disapprove of the National Emergency Declaration because they believe Trump's use of the law is an unprecedented (or unjustified) use of the NEA that will create a precedent which permits future Democratic Presidents to declare national emergencies in order to get access to additional funds for a project after the request for those funds were rejected by Congress.

Is that a persuasive reason to disapprove of the Declaration in your mind?

 

So like I said : Their argument is "no because the shoe can be on the other foot".

Did you not read my post at all?

My position is that congress should never delegate powers it holds to the executive, no matter the current ratio of letters next to names. The constitution doesn't provide for this emergency power set up for a reason, that's not a bug its a feature.

 

Yes, Mitch isn't having a great day.

 

Donald Trump is the one trying to flaunt the rule of law, as he had done all his life.

 

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

I realize that it is a current right wing talking point. I heard the Fox news models peddling it this morning. It didn't make any sense to me at all.

 

Sometimes the end doesn’t justify the means.

 

I should have said: "Close, but simplistic and you might not understand their argument." But your snarky response is noted and you are venturing very close to trollish behavior.

Trump's use of the NEA in this instance is unprecedented. I do not believe that his interpretation is justified, either legally nor under any rational interpretation of the phrase "national emergency."

 

Well done with your prediction, sir!

Right on the money.

The resolution to disapprove Trump's National Emergency Declaration passed 59-41, with 12 Republicans joining to vote against Trump.

 

Trump has the legal authority to declare a national emergency

 

This is not a referendum on the wall itself and whether it should be built.

It's a vote on whether or not the president should be abusing the ability of the office to declare emergencies that involve non-emergencies. Republicans and Democrats alike understand the ability for this to be abused. It's not meant to be a system to sidestep Congress when Congress clearly decided not to give the funding the president had requested.

And Congress is right to vote against it. I hope they feel strongly enough about it to override a veto. It would be a welcome show of bipartisan teamwork towards a greater good.

 

In this case the “end” is a partisan liberal effort to deny trump a victory on border security

 

We are not a direct democracy and do not decide national emergencies by referendom