US Government shutdown begins

[RoofGardener]

24 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Ok. 90% is an exaggeration. But the trend is there.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/visa-overstays-outnumber-illegal-border-crossings-trend-expected-continue-n730216

Not as many are coming through the desert as used to.

Partly that is due to creating "Walls" reaching out to screen urban/suburban areas such as San Diego. Making it harder mean fewer people coming across.

Remove that "90%" from my post and it is correct still.

Thanks for that DieChecker  Most helpful. 

I guess the difference is that you can always reduce the number of visa's being issued, especially to countries that produce a lot of 'overstays'. But you can't reduce the number of "walk ins". 

Oh.. wait... unless you build a wall ?  

[RavenHawk]

8 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Well look, this is supposed to be a government of compromise and consensus.  You may not get everything you want because just about half the country wants something else.  That's where compromise comes in on both sides and both sides seem to have forgotten how to do that.  Plenty of blame to go around. Yes for the president too.  He is supposed to be the great deal maker.  One reason we elected him.  He is supposed to be a savy businessman.

The consensus should be that we need to defend our borders.  The compromise is how do we do that?  There are some common sense dos and don’ts.  But this has nothing to do with keeping the government running.  And the only fault lies with those holding this government hostage.  A great leader also knows how to give malcontents (of both parties) enough rope to hang themselves to make a better deal down the road.  Sometimes you have to stumble and fall on your face before you can pick yourself up and move forward.  Most Americans are law abiding citizens.  They see no reason to reward breaking the law.  Our compassion should never be used to usurp the law.  This is an act of desperation from the Progressives and they shouldn’t be encouraged to repeat this tactic.  Trump is very savvy.

 

Funny thing, I am for secure borders, every country should have them.  But a wall is pointless.  Genghis Khan proved that about 800 years ago.  Wanna stop drugs, stop drugs.  Wanna stop laborers, stop laborers.  A wall doesn't do either.  Wanna follow Preaches plan for dreamers do that.   Do something Mr. great deal maker.

Darkhunter took my thunder, that’s ok…  Khan overwhelmed a weakness in the wall, which was society itself.  It had gotten weak and forgot their own laws and freedoms.  They took them for granted; very much like we are doing today.  When the wall was properly manned and maintained, it is very effective.  For us, it doesn’t matter if the wall that gets built is a mile thick, mile high, and a mile deep or just a line drawn in the sand, if it isn’t properly manned, it’s not going to stop a thing.  We won’t need it to stop a horde, just manage flow.  The cost of building the wall is a fraction to what it will cost to operate it.  I’ve already suggested where the man power is going to come from and the benefits it will be to our future.  You take the Selective Service and turn it into a para-military force or a domestic peace corps with teeth.  You basically get the youth involved in this nation.  Teach them a wide range of skills and use those skills to help the people and the land.  This will build a sense of community and belonging.  And eventually some will end up as leaders in Washington.  We’ll never have the likes of a Schumer or Pelosi ever again.  The concept of Republican and Democrat will wane as our government becomes more like what our Founding Fathers envisioned.

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

The consensus should be that we need to defend our borders.  The compromise is how do we do that?  There are some common sense dos and don’ts.  But this has nothing to do with keeping the government running.

On this I agree.  It has nothing to do with keeping the government running except it is a bargaining chip.  It is the power a weaker party holds to bring about negotiation,  The Republicans have used it as well during the Obama terms.  I would say the compromises were good for the country.  You can see every  major sports team that is in an underdog position use this ploy.  They use time outs and penalties to their best advantage.  The lead team runs out the clock.  You may say that government is not a sport, and I wish it were not, but it is a game for the rich and powerful.  

As you say a wall is not what keeps people out it is the manpower and the will.  I am all for that.  I think you should brush up on your Chinese history if you think they had freedoms to forget.  Nevertheless, your point is true; it is not a wall that protects borders.

Are you suggesting universal military service like Israel and Switzerland?  The Selective Service is not para-military it is the manpower acquisition arm of the military services when enough people don't volunteer.  Or another CCC that helped with major infrastructure projects?  Not a bad idea.

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

This will build a sense of community and belonging.  And eventually some will end up as leaders in Washington.  We’ll never have the likes of a Schumer or Pelosi ever again.

I question this part.  Most of our military volunteers are young people looking for a future and to better their positions.   Schumers, Pelosis, Trumps, and Ryans do not serve in the military.  The children of the Kock brothers will find deferments.  Those will still be the people in Washington.  The young people who serve may indeed make a healthier society and maybe they will get sick of current officials and elect new ones.  I generally vote for veterans of either party when I can because I believe even if they don't agree with all of my politics, they know how to serve. That's good enough for me.

The thing about compromise is that we are one people, we are not at war even if we disagree.  Scorched earth policy can backfire.  I think that is why the Republicans are resisting the nuclear option.  They might need it in the future.

My personal bent is to eliminate illegal immigration and give the DACA kids citizenship. Easy to disagree with that I know.  It is more of a feeling than a logic backed decision.

Until about 1882 with the Chinese Exclusion Act, the United States did not have much of an immigration policy.  Also in 1882 certain European nationalities were restricted.  Before that,  to "come here legally" all our ancestors from Europe had to do was book passage and get off the boat.

 

Would you really want an all powerful president?  Or is compromise a check on executive authority as well?

[preacherman76]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 11:07 AM, .ZZ. said:

It's real easy to dismiss this shutdown unless it directly affects you.

If my veteran's pension is delayed it's on Schumer, not Trump. The military is being held hostage and used for political blackmail.

Illegal aliens getting protection and amnesty is more important to Dems.

Yea that is true Z. There will be people hurt by this. Im just glad the polls are showing the people understand what is happening here, and who is to blame.

[preacherman76]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 10:43 AM, Agent0range said:

Trump had a cute little televised press conference in which he stated that he would support whatever the people in the room put on his desk.  A bipartisan agreement was reached, a bill was sent to his desk, and he didn't sign it.  Mitch McConnell publicly stated that negotiations would be much easier if anyone really knew what Trump wanted.  Trump once tweeted, while in office, that we need a good government shutdown.  Schumer was in Trumps office, even offered a wall, and Trump went off the rails...as usual.  They can try to pin this on the democrats all they want..but people who know the difference between boarder and border know better.

Republicans are willing to pass a non controversial bill right now, with the votes to do it. Its Dems that are directly sabotaging that effort. Bottom-line Dems believe illegals are more important then you. There is no other way to swing this. They are the ones stopping this bill for reasons that have nothing to do with the budget.

If you think that grammar is bad, you should have seen me when I first got here 11 years ago. I hadn't had to write anything in years before that. Took a while to knock off the rust.

 

[RavenHawk]

Well, it's Monday morning and I'll still going to work and will be paid for today.  However, it is unclear how long emergency funding will last.  Next week could be different.

[preacherman76]

12 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Well, it's Monday morning and I'll still going to work and will be paid for today.  However, it is unclear how long emergency funding will last.  Next week could be different.

Hopefully the republicans will use the nuclear option if it goes on much longer. I really don't know what they are waiting for.

[Gromdor]

16 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Hopefully the republicans will use the nuclear option if it goes on much longer. I really don't know what they are waiting for.

They don't want to set a precedent on dropping the vote to 51 on financial matters because it could be used against them in the future.  That and despite the finger pointing, only short term bandaids have been proposed.  Going nuclear to kick the can down the road a couple weeks is pretty much a waste of a nuke.

[travelnjones]

And today is no different from Thursday.  The pointlessness of the federal governance comes into greater clarity with each passing day.  

[LV-426]

Seems the shutdown is ending for the time being:

US shutdown to end as Senate strikes deal

"The US government partial shutdown is set to end after Senate Republicans and Democrats voted to approve a temporary funding bill.

Senator Chuck Schumer said Democrats would support the bill if Republicans addressed a programme that shields young immigrants from deportation.

Democrats refused to vote for the bill unless they secured protections for recipients of the Obama-era programme.

Mr Schumer said the three-day shutdown was expected to end in a few hours."

[Hawken]

Need "Term Limits."

[RoofGardener]

Out of curiosity.... where are the parents of these "Dreamers". Also, why haven't they applied for citizenship ? 

[Myles]

1 hour ago, LV-426 said:

Seems the shutdown is ending for the time being:

 

Senator Chuck Schumer said Democrats would support the bill if Republicans addressed a programme that shields young illegal immigrants from deportation.

Democrats refused to vote for the bill unless they secured protections for recipients of the Obama-era programme.

Mr Schumer said the three-day shutdown was expected to end in a few hours."

Man, they always forget that word in there.

[Myles]

On 1/21/2018 at 1:15 PM, RavenHawk said:

T

 

Darkhunter took my thunder, that’s ok…  Khan overwhelmed a weakness in the wall, which was society itself.  It had gotten weak and forgot their own laws and freedoms.  They took them for granted; very much like we are doing today.  When the wall was properly manned and maintained, it is very effective.  For us, it doesn’t matter if the wall that gets built is a mile thick, mile high, and a mile deep or just a line drawn in the sand, if it isn’t properly manned, it’s not going to stop a thing.  We won’t need it to stop a horde, just manage flow.  The cost of building the wall is a fraction to what it will cost to operate it.  I’ve already suggested where the man power is going to come from and the benefits it will be to our future.  You take the Selective Service and turn it into a para-military force or a domestic peace corps with teeth.  You basically get the youth involved in this nation.  Teach them a wide range of skills and use those skills to help the people and the land.  This will build a sense of community and belonging.  And eventually some will end up as leaders in Washington.  We’ll never have the likes of a Schumer or Pelosi ever again.  The concept of Republican and Democrat will wane as our government becomes more like what our Founding Fathers envisioned.

I think moving some basic training to spots near the wall can help with affordable manpower.   Drills, hikes, runs and such could all be done along the wall.   Camera surveillance could be monitored by already paid military personnel.  

Just a thought.  

[CeresExpo2000]

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Hopefully the republicans will use the nuclear option if it goes on much longer. I really don't know what they are waiting for.

It's over.

 

[CeresExpo2000]

Vote 81 -18

President Trump says he is glad Democrats came to their senses.

 

[preacherman76]

Dems must have been getting a lot of heat. That's a big turn of events. Just hope this isn't gonna happen again in 3 weeks.

[Glockornothing]

4 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Out of curiosity.... where are the parents of these "Dreamers". Also, why haven't they applied for citizenship ? 

Parents? There are numerous reasons not to actually become a citizen, biggest is now you have to pay taxes, you don't get free tuition and automatic acceptance into college in California, and you would be punished for crimes committed as a citizen.

[F3SS]

Strange days. I can’t believe cnn ran this op-ed. http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/22/opinions/a-big-loss-for-schumer-and-democrats-opinion-jennings/index.html

The democrat party just keeps going all in with a 2-7 off-suit and their big stack is about gone. 

[RavenHawk]

On 1/21/2018 at 1:48 PM, Tatetopa said:

On this I agree.  It has nothing to do with keeping the government running except it is a bargaining chip.  It is the power a weaker party holds to bring about negotiation,  The Republicans have used it as well during the Obama terms.

Running government is about give and take and compromise.  Both sides use bargaining chips, however, the Republicans agree with all the Progressive points in the CR, there is no bargaining chip to play.  This is strictly one side holding the nation hostage because they are crybabies.  Undoubtedly, the Progressives are the master of using the bargaining chip and the Republicans are rubbing their nose in it.  As we just saw today, the Progressives gave in to public opinion.  The public saw that the Progressives are more concerned over Illegals rather than American citizens.

 

Schumer needs to swallow his pride and present a deal to the President on immigration.  Something like “Mr President, we’re not going to support a wall but we will support closing the border using low and high tech methods and the required manpower.  And here is a proposal for Daca and immigration in general.  Using a form of amnesty, we’re going to keep the best of the best and deport the rest.  Those receiving amnesty can’t vote for 20 years and business can’t exploit their labor.  etc., etc.”  This would seem to be very close to the common sense compromise.  Do you think Schumer has any interest in that?  Hell no!  He wants the cheap votes.  He could care less about the humanity.  Just talk to the Blacks of the inner city under Progressive rule.

 

I would say the compromises were good for the country. 

There were compromises under Obama?  Hardly!  He ruled as “my way or the highway”.  If trump is playing hardball, the Progressives can only blame themselves.  Between the CR and immigration, the Progressives appear very foolish and try as much as they can, go against common sense and the people see that.  The progressives will try very hard to hang on to their source for cheap votes because they have to continually renew that resource as in time, most illegals are or become more conservative in time and once they understand that they can vote for who they want to, tend to vote conservative.  And that’s the thing; the running of a Republican form of government is conservative.

 

You can see every  major sports team that is in an underdog position use this ploy.  They use time outs and penalties to their best advantage.  The lead team runs out the clock.  You may say that government is not a sport, and I wish it were not, but it is a game for the rich and powerful.  

This is a very poor example.  It definitely has the form but completely lacking in substance.  They are both playing for keeps but one is just a game and the other is over people’s lives.  Progressives refused to vote for.

 

As you say a wall is not what keeps people out it is the manpower and the will.  I am all for that.  I think you should brush up on your Chinese history if you think they had freedoms to forget.  Nevertheless, your point is true; it is not a wall that protects borders.

Well, that is still a wall.  We still need that wall but I think we can have a “smart wall”.  A wall that will have many layers (physical as well as administrative controls).  And I think that is what Trump wants but he’s holding to his great wall as his bargaining chip.  I’m pretty sure that his supporters will be fine with a smart wall because they understand what the goal here is.

 

As far as Chinese freedom goes, they had a kind of freedom then.  As any subject of any Monarchy had.  It wasn’t until the Industrial Revolution that a new kind of freedom emerged.  The IR gave birth to two new forms.  One was the Age of Enlightenment and the other was Socialism.  One was geared off the individual & Natural Rights and the other was just a rehash of Monarchy without the Monarchy.

 

Are you suggesting universal military service like Israel and Switzerland?  The Selective Service is not para-military it is the manpower acquisition arm of the military services when enough people don't volunteer.  Or another CCC that helped with major infrastructure projects?  Not a bad idea.

To some degree yes.  Some would call this mandatory service but it’s not that.  Think of it as an obligation for living in a free nation.  Washington said it best:

“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency. ”

 "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289

 

I’m suggesting changing the mission of the Selective Service from an on-paper force to as I mentioned earlier, a domestic peace corps with teeth.  This produces about 3 million youth a year, so with a 2-year term of service, some 6 million will be available at any one time.  The biggest cost will be support but what do college students live off of in a week?  A large pizza and a packet of Ramen noodles; I remember those days.  If they need more, they can raise their own beef.  They would have the manpower.  As the 2nd Amendment implies that we have a well-regulated militia which means discipline, order, and training.  But as a whole, will not be involved in warfare, unless in case of a direct invasion.  With 6 million on immediate call up, it would take at least a dozen nations ganging up.  That’s probably not going to happen.  Surely, some will move on from the Selective Service into the military.

 

The majority will be used from border patrol to disaster relief.  The individual could spend one week in the month on border patrol and then spend the rest of the time in class learning how to operate heavy machinery, build rail roads, first aid, setting up an aid station, firefighting, building homes, sink wells, animal husbandry, solving problems, etc.  The list of skills is endless.  There is need from one end of this country to the other.  Defense isn’t just confronting an armed invasion.

 

Last year, we had a term cement itself into our vocabulary.  That is “Cajun Navy”.  I can envision thousands of small craft get in behind a hurricane and as soon as it passes, land 1 million young men and women on the beaches fully capable of taking on any challenge and overcoming any obstacle, with full packs and perhaps a bit more, carrying food, water, medicine, gasoline, tools, communication gear, etc.  Like ants on an ant hill, spreading out and heading inland to do whatever is needed to save lives and begin the recovery and rebuilding.  Utilize thousands of the LS3 pack mules loaded beyond measure to travel along with the men and women.  Then later establish an overhead net of drones to coordinate movement, to get the gear to where it needs to go.  Meanwhile, the Navy could land heavy equipment to start rebuilding infrastructure and services.  Perhaps even use airborne to land at remote airfields or use the CBs to build a new airfield to get closer to the need and the Selective Service is there alongside pulling the lion’s share of the manpower.  Can you image such a scenario in the case of Puerto Rico, Houston, Florida, Katrina, or Sandy?  We waste too much blood and treasure sitting idle.  There is so much more we can do for our own people and be able to instill a deep sense of appreciation to those who sacrifice.  Not just the soldiers but the first responders, and so too the Selective Service.  This gives our youth skin in the game.  This builds leadership.  We just need a better name.

 

I question this part.  Most of our military volunteers are young people looking for a future and to better their positions.   Schumers, Pelosis, Trumps, and Ryans do not serve in the military.  The children of the Kock brothers will find deferments.  Those will still be the people in Washington.  The young people who serve may indeed make a healthier society and maybe they will get sick of current officials and elect new ones.  I generally vote for veterans of either party when I can because I believe even if they don't agree with all of my politics, they know how to serve. That's good enough for me.

Trump did attend a military school in his youth.  But it would be almost impossible to avoid Selective Service in the future and there should be a requirement that one must have participated with the Selective Service before getting into public service.  Here, I draw upon the writings of Robert Heinlein with his concept of the difference between Citizen and Civilian.  There is plenty of room for abuse but I view it more along the lines of what Washington stated as opposed to something totalitarian or authoritarian.  I think that is what tempered Heinlein’s writing.

 

The thing about compromise is that we are one people, we are not at war even if we disagree.  Scorched earth policy can backfire.  I think that is why the Republicans are resisting the nuclear option.  They might need it in the future.

The Republicans at least consider the consequences, but we have always been at war.  It was just more noticeable during the Civil War.  This division goes all the way back to the estrangement between Ben and William Franklin.  It is part of our duality, but there is an evil element to this.  At one time, liberal and conservative would argue and argue but when it was over, they both had the best interest of this nation at heart.  Socialism is a greedy mistress and is jealous of this great country.

 

My personal bent is to eliminate illegal immigration and give the DACA kids citizenship. Easy to disagree with that I know.  It is more of a feeling than a logic backed decision.

And where does it end?  This has to stop somewhere.  I like to use a simple analogy, given that the logistics are possible and let’s say that every person in the world decides to cross our borders to get benefits, would we still be America?  Yes, that is an exaggeration but I hope it draws the point.  It wouldn’t take 7 billion to collapse our society and culture.  It would only take a few 10s of millions.  Uncontrolled mass migration brings poverty, disease, and crime.  There is no guidance or incentive to assimilate which hardens the old sensibilities which was the reason migrants came to this country to get away from.  Personally, I am all for the Daca kids getting their citizenship, however, it needs to be done legally and not without penalty.  It is tragic as these kids are American.  They’ve known nothing else.  You might say it is unfair and it is, but you can only blame their parents for that.  Each kid and each situation needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis.  The bottom line is that we can’t take them all.  We can’t rob those legal immigrants of their fair turn (those that followed the law).  We need to be very restrictive on immigration.  Or we could go the other way and open our borders to anyone, but then do not provide government aid.  You work or die.  When people know that coming here isn’t wining the lottery, most will stop coming.  So we either close the border or stop financial aid.  Or both.

 

Until about 1882 with the Chinese Exclusion Act, the United States did not have much of an immigration policy.  Also in 1882 certain European nationalities were restricted.  Before that,  to "come here legally" all our ancestors from Europe had to do was book passage and get off the boat.

Before 1882, less than 100,000 were coming here every year.  By 1880 there was almost 7 million total immigrants and they were needed to fill an empty land.  Back then, government aid was unheard of.  Interesting that you mention the CEA as this eventually lead to establishing Ellis Island.  That gave New York City its character but it was a good place to incentivize assimilation.  A few years ago, I was in Nevada City and strolled by this old house and out front is a dedication plaque that reads:

 

Aaron A Sargent

1827 – 1887

Homesteads of Nevada County’s statesman, a 49er, arrived here in 1850 as a journeyman printer.  Editor and owner of the county’s first newspaper the Nevada Journal.  Admitted to the bar 1854.  District Attorney 1855 – 1857.

 

First citizen elected to the House of Representatives 37th Congress 1861 – 1863; 41st and 42nd Congress 1869 – 1873.  First citizen elected to the United States Senate 1873 -1879.  Yeoman of the Republican Party.

 

Author of the bill which created the first Transcontinental Railroad.

 

Champion of the Woman’s Suffrage Movement, author of the Anthony Amendment (19th) giving women the right to vote; author of the immigration law, the first United States policy on immigration; author of the bill that revolutionized the mining industry, permitting mineral lands to be held in fee simple; author of the bill making the Pacific States and Territories a U.S. judicial circuit; secured passage of the bill to establish a branch mint in the state of Nevada; secured appropriations for the construction of the mint and appraiser’s buildings in San Francisco.

 

Envoy extraordinary and minister Plenipotentiary from the United States to the Court of Berlin, Germany, 1882 – 1884.

 

Dedicated August 12, 1978 by the Nevada County Historical Society.

 

Very impressive accomplishments.  The Transcontinental Railroad and Women Suffrage have origins from the same mind.  Doing more research, I find 2 articles from the “Overland Monthly” from 1885 about the Wyoming anti-Chinese Riot.  One article is authored by Sargent. 

 

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=iau.31858036876765;view=1up;seq=9

 

In many ways, things are still the same.  Both articles make their points but ultimately, it isn’t about a particular race, it is about the rapid concentration of any race with vastly different sensibilities to the indigenous that prevents it to assimilate with the least hassle.  This is why we need limited immigration whether it is legal or otherwise.  But to think that the CEA is based on racism is incredulous to believe coming from the author of the 19th Amendment.

 

Would you really want an all powerful president?  Or is compromise a check on executive authority as well?

I do not want an all powerful President.  We had a wannabe King in the previous one.  We need a President that is a good manager.  Trump is unorthodox but he is a good manager.  The President has a vision and it’s up to Congress to compromise on that.  It is the people that decide if the vision is right.  That is the ultimate check on authority at the source.

[Merc14]

Guess Shut-down Schumer didn't like the poll numbers he was seeing.   Trump mopped the floor with the dems once again.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Merc14

[Gromdor]

23 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Guess Shut-down Schumer didn't like the poll numbers he was seeing.   Trump mopped the floor with the dems once again.

Not sure a three week budget bill is something to cheer over.  If the gop goes back on their promise, Schumer can just do it all over again next month or even worse just continuing doing few week long bandaids every month without ever fulfilling Trump's budgetary wishlist.

[Merc14]

44 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Not sure a three week budget bill is something to cheer over.  If the gop goes back on their promise, Schumer can just do it all over again next month or even worse just continuing doing few week long bandaids every month without ever fulfilling Trump's budgetary wishlist.

Why would Schumer do the shut-down again when he got killed in the polls?  Polls show Americans are NOT for DACA and neither were they in support of the democrats in this shut down and that is the ONLY reason Schumer ended it.  

[RavenHawk]

17 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Not sure a three week budget bill is something to cheer over.

No victory but it sure does feel good.

 

If the gop goes back on their promise,

If McConnell goes back on his word, he’s going to have to answer to Conservatives across the board.

 

Schumer can just do it all over again next month or even worse just continuing doing few week long bandaids every month without ever fulfilling Trump's budgetary wishlist.

That’s fine.  It would be just more of the same from shut-down Schumer.  The public will get very tired of that.  Reminds me of the line “So they call me Concentration Camp Ehrhardt?”

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

Why would Schumer do the shut-down again when he got killed in the polls?  Polls show Americans are NOT for DACA and neither were they in support of the democrats in this shut down and that is the ONLY reason Schumer ended it.  

The people who are rabidly anti-Trump would love it because it p***es Trump off and stops him from governing. At this point, they’re the only people left who’d willingly vote Democrat without the Democrats doing a lot of soul searching, so obviously it’s them they’re courting.