Yes. Absolutely:

President Donald Trump has spent the past few days using his Twitter account to blame Democrats for a potential impending shutdown, hyperbolically accusing them of favoring amnesty for all over the U.S. military. But his tactic isn't working, and according to a new poll out Tuesday, Americans will blame Trump and the Republican Party should Congress and the president fail to fund the government past the Friday night deadline.

http://www.newsweek.com/government-shutdown-donald-trump-republicans-782938

From the article, "A new Hart Research Associates poll, commissioned on behalf of the liberal organization MoveOn.org, found that"

Just like the Rachel Madow story on misrepresenting an e-mail, this story needs to be taken with a seriously critical grain of salt. I'm pretty sure MoveOn.org commissioned a poll before the last election that said HRC had a 150% chance of winning against Trump. I haven't been able to confirm that yet, but I believe I saw it in an e-mail somewhere, so it must be true.

As important as action on DACA is, Democrats should not use the threat of a government shutdown to force that action. Shutdowns were bad for the country when Republicans did it (though Mitch McConnell would never admit that now). They will be bad for the country if Democrats do it.

Whatever a poll right now may show, I think shutdowns hurt the party that instigates them.

Even if there is a bipartisan compromise in the Senate, the right-wingers in the House aren't going to approve any bill to help the Dreamers. The Dems might as well resign themselves to this. The issue is getting tangled up in the courts, which may buy time for the kids facing deportation or trying to renew their work permits. The Dems probably would be better off to vote for the spending bill and then make Trump and the GOP own the Dreamer issue. There is a strong majority of support for these kids among the American public, and many Republicans outside the Freedom Caucus don't want this issue hanging around their necks like a fat dead albatross.

Bona Fide Bear said:

---

CFrom the article, "A new Hart Research Associates poll, commissioned on behalf of the liberal organization MoveOn.org, found that"

Just like the Rachel Madow story on misrepresenting an e-mail, this story needs to be taken with a seriously critical grain of salt. I'm pretty sure MoveOn.org commissioned a poll before the last election that said HRC had a 150% chance of winning against Trump. I haven't been able to confirm that yet, but I believe I saw it in an e-mail somewhere, so it must be true.

---

Your anti bias is showing bias.

cinque said:

---

Bona Fide Bear said:

---

From the article, "A new Hart Research Associates poll, commissioned on behalf of the liberal organization MoveOn.org, found that"

Just like the Rachel Madow story on misrepresenting an e-mail, this story needs to be taken with a seriously critical grain of salt. I'm pretty sure MoveOn.org commissioned a poll before the last election that said HRC had a 150% chance of winning against Trump. I haven't been able to confirm that yet, but I believe I saw it in an e-mail somewhere, so it must be true.

---

Your ant bias is showing bias.

---

If you had posted an article from FNC, I would do the same thing. It's called thinking critically. If you post something from Rachel Madow, I know it's going to have a left lean to it, so I approach the story with that mindset. If you post something from Sean Hannity, I know it's going to have a right lean to it, so I approach the story with that mindset. You should give it a try sometime, you may have noticed that Rachel Madow's story was completely fabricated before you even posted it on here.

Bona Fide Bear said:

---

cinque said:

---

Bona Fide Bear said:

---

From the article, "A new Hart Research Associates poll, commissioned on behalf of the liberal organization MoveOn.org, found that"

Just like the Rachel Madow story on misrepresenting an e-mail, this story needs to be taken with a seriously critical grain of salt. I'm pretty sure MoveOn.org commissioned a poll before the last election that said HRC had a 150% chance of winning against Trump. I haven't been able to confirm that yet, but I believe I saw it in an e-mail somewhere, so it must be true.

---

Your ant bias is showing bias.

---

If you had posted an article from FNC, I would do the same thing. It's called thinking critically. If you post something from Rachel Madow, I know it's going to have a left lean to it, so I approach the story with that mindset. If you post something from Sean Hannity, I know it's going to have a right lean to it, so I approach the story with that mindset. You should give it a try sometime, you may have noticed that Rachel Madow's story was completely fabricated before you even posted it on here.

---

Rachael's report was accurate. Go read Flake's speech.

cinque said:

---

Bona Fide Bear said:

---

cinque said:

---

Bona Fide Bear said:

---

From the article, "A new Hart Research Associates poll, commissioned on behalf of the liberal organization MoveOn.org, found that"

Just like the Rachel Madow story on misrepresenting an e-mail, this story needs to be taken with a seriously critical grain of salt. I'm pretty sure MoveOn.org commissioned a poll before the last election that said HRC had a 150% chance of winning against Trump. I haven't been able to confirm that yet, but I believe I saw it in an e-mail somewhere, so it must be true.

---

Your ant bias is showing bias.

---

If you had posted an article from FNC, I would do the same thing. It's called thinking critically. If you post something from Rachel Madow, I know it's going to have a left lean to it, so I approach the story with that mindset. If you post something from Sean Hannity, I know it's going to have a right lean to it, so I approach the story with that mindset. You should give it a try sometime, you may have noticed that Rachel Madow's story was completely fabricated before you even posted it on here.

---

Rachael's report was accurate. Go read Flake's speech.

---

Rachel Madow reported the WH misspelled the Dr's name, when in fact a reporter from the Washington Post misspelled his name when she wrote the email. RM tried to pass the email from the WaPo reporter as a quote from the WH, but it was just a mistake in the WaPo reporter's email. When will you finally admit that this was bad "reporting" by Rachel Madow?

Well, the GOP headliners are poised to blow up any agreement extending CHIP and/or including DACA.

Worst governing majority in a century.

You care more about illegal immigrants than our military.

I get that you're a paid "activist", but I'll explain anyways:

Democrats are coming off bad here, they are going "all in" on DACA. They do NOT want to make a productive compromise when it comes to actual American citizens. I think they will just "resist" to the bitter end. Fine.
Republicans want to make a deal with stipulations, they are even willing to sweeten the deal by giving a long term funding to CHIP. CHIP was something used to scare people when Trump was elected, every Democrat I spoke to said that Trump was going to cancel funding to CHIP. Now the blood is on the Democrats hands. They are willing to sacrafice CHIP for DACA. Think about how crazy that is. CHIP helps US Citizens. DACA does not.

The "resist" movement is going to destroy the DNC. They want a "scary" Government shutdown? Fine. What people don't realize is that Trump gets to decide where the emergency and necessary funding goes. The first thing, I predict, that gets cut is the House and Senate salaries. They make too much anyway. Social services and military funding will not go unfunded.

So a message to House/Senate that are "resisting", you pass a budget deal or you don't get your paycheck. Many of the "resist" people in DC cannot see passed their noses on what repercussions their decisions will cause. It will only make the US Government leaner and meaner.

This was ALSO a goal for the Trump admin, to cut Government spending. He's a master at cutting corners and getting under budget. He's a business man. This is what he does. If a budget deal DOESN'T pass the swamp will swirl down the drain even faster.

Either way, Trump wins. Deal with it.

Part of me WANTS the budget not to pass, it will force a real discussion into House/Senate salaries and TERM LIMITS.

I don't think there will be a shut down, but if it does happen it's not the end of the world in the nearest. Disagree with me? Let's discuss the counter points. There are none. Either way, Trump and America wins.

I know your shareblue goals and what you're paid to do is to shill until the conservatives leave...but we aren't leaving, ever.

Doc Holliday said:

---

You care more about illegal immigrants than our military.

I get that you're a paid "activist", but I'll explain anyways:

Democrats are coming off bad here, they are going "all in" on DACA. They do NOT want to make a productive compromise when it comes to actual American citizens. I think they will just "resist" to the bitter end. Fine.
Republicans want to make a deal with stipulations, they are even willing to sweeten the deal by giving a long term funding to CHIP. CHIP was something used to scare people when Trump was elected, every Democrat I spoke to said that Trump was going to cancel funding to CHIP. Now the blood is on the Democrats hands. They are willing to sacrafice CHIP for DACA. Think about how crazy that is. CHIP helps US Citizens. DACA does not.

The "resist" movement is going to destroy the DNC. They want a "scary" Government shutdown? Fine. What people don't realize is that Trump gets to decide where the emergency and necessary funding goes. The first thing, I predict, that gets cut is the House and Senate salaries. They make too much anyway. Social services and military funding will not go unfunded.

So a message to House/Senate that are "resisting", you pass a budget deal or you don't get your paycheck. Many of the "resist" people in DC cannot see passed their noses on what repercussions their decisions will cause. It will only make the US Government leaner and meaner.

This was ALSO a goal for the Trump admin, to cut Government spending. He's a master at cutting corners and getting under budget. He's a business man. This is what he does. If a budget deal DOESN'T pass the swamp will swirl down the drain even faster.

Either way, Trump wins. Deal with it.

Part of me WANTS the budget not to pass, it will force a real discussion into House/Senate salaries and TERM LIMITS.

I don't think there will be a shut down, but if it does happen it's not the end of the world in the nearest. Disagree with me? Let's discuss the counter points. There are none. Either way, Trump and America wins.

I know your shareblue goals and what you're paid to do is to shill until the conservatives leave...but we aren't leaving, ever.

---

Worst bunch of goobers ever.

should they