The Trump administration told states on Saturday that they must “immediately undo” any actions to provide full food stamp benefits to low-income families, in a move that added to the uncertainty surrounding the nation’s largest anti-hunger program during the government shutdown. In late-night guidance seen by The New York Times, the Agriculture Department also threatened financial penalties against states.
Why is feeding people political? What value add is forcing people to starve? Monsters.
I think their strategy is to make the gov shutdown as painful as possible, then point fingers at Dems.
Honestly they should have caved a long time ago. Trump and his cronies are loving the shutdown.
No, they absolutely should not have, and should continue not to. The message they should be receiving from the most recent elections is that the Republicans are losing support, not gaining it.
What they should be doing is the opposite. It is in the GOP’s best interest to reopen the government. Until they can see that their actions are losing them all of their support, ask for more.
For every additional day that someone starves due to the government’s failure to provide, ask for something to compensate them. Every additional day that people work without pay, demand something in return for them.
Eventually they will need to cave and compromise. Move the bar so far back that they have no choice but to compromise harder.
[citation needed]. Republican voters do not want SNAP to even exist. Preventing people from having access to food is what they voted for.
Surely you’ve read the news on the most recent elections? Or will we ignore Democrats making major victories from New York City to Mississippi?
Are we going to ignore the giant national Republican victory last year? Show me scientific evidence that shows that conservatives are losing support due to the shutdown.
Are we going to ignore the giant national Democratic victory a few years ago?
We’re talking about the Government shutdown and SNAP benefits in this thread. There has only been one set of national elections during this shutdown.
…you mean 5 years ago ?
Which is why I asked about the government shutdown…
Yes. Both are equally irrelevant to the shutdown that has been going on for only a couple months. There has only been one major set of elections since the shutdown, which was my point.
They are all varying degrees of relevant (certainly some more than other), including the most recent one, which is why I asked for relevant, conclusive evidence and not just speculation.
I disagree - there is no appeasing a tyrant - ask the universities that caved to Trump how that worked out for getting their funding restored.
This news demonstrates exactly why, and how democrats need to throw that narrative out the window.
Who said anything about appeasing him? I’m talking about reopening the gov and getting people fed. We have nothing to gain, they’re more than happy to use starvation as a negotiation strategy.
Reopening the government without ACA subsidies literally kills people when they can’t afford their new premiums. There are people for whom affordable access to healthcare is the difference between life-saving medication and, well, the lack of that.
Starvation of people on SNAP is also literally the GOP’s stated goal. If Dems fund the government and let those people who need healthcare die, the GOP isn’t going to play nice and keep funding SNAP. They’re gonna gut it like they’ve always dreamt of doing anyway. They already signaled this with the BBB.
That would be a valid point if conservatives had any motivation at all to come to the table.
Exactly my point.
If they were going to defund it, they would have done so already. They defunded everything else.
I’m not convinced that appeasement strategies have been very successful with dictators in the past.
I don’t know where people are getting the idea that I suggested anyone appease him/them…
I’m not sure what else you could have meant when you stated that “they” (maybe you didn’t mean the dems? But it sure reads that way) should have caved long ago. What reason is there to cave other then to continue to appease fascist tyrants?
“Maybe if we give them what they want, they’ll stop holding the most vulnerable American populations hostage” is not a good strategy.
I couldn’t have been more clear…
They’re not holding anyone hostage. They’re just killing them. And they’re going to keep killing them up til the Dems cave. Dems have no bargaining chips. Shutdown continues? Conservatives win. Cave to demands? Conservatives win but they also stem the bleeding.
You could have been substantially more clear by, you know, actually saying something substantial. The only statement that you’ve made is that we should continue to give fascists everything they ask for because they keep threatening suffering if we don’t. And let’s be clear, the suffering is happening either way.
I’m not sure what you think the concept of holding someone hostage is, if not exactly this. You literally said they’re not holding anyone hostage and then described a hostage situation, as “we’re going to keep killing people until you meet our demands” is perhaps the most clear cut hostage situation that can exist. Additionally, if the dems had no bargaining chips, they wouldn’t have anything to cave on, but the fact that we’re even having this conversation proves otherwise. They have something the GOP wants, and the GOP is threatening to kill the population they’re supposed to represent until they get it.
The more I read back your statement, the more completely batshit delusional it sounds. It’s like you’re using words with no understanding of what they mean.
And “stemming the bleeding” is literally a strategy of appeasement.
If your only strategy is to make up bullshit that everyone can see that I did not say, while ignoring everything I did, I’m not going to continue engaging this discussion.
This you? The first one is a hostage situation. This is where one party has makes threats to a second party unless a third party or government organization takes action according to their demands. The second is a thing we called appeasement, a policy of making concessions to an aggressor, usually out of fear of worse aggressions.
Act as offended as you want. I’m not looking for a discussion. I am addressing the things you are saying and telling you, point blank, that they are stupid as hell. It’s not my fault if you’re saying things you don’t, or choose not to, understand. My “only stategy” is to not sit idly by while people say stupid shit like the garbage that you’ve been typing.
A hostage situation is not where they just straight up kill people for no reason. The point of holding someone hostage is that they DO NOT kill them UNLESS their demands aren’t met.
Again, no it is not. The point is feeding people, not “appeasing” conservatives.
Then WTF are you doing here? It’s not my fault that you don’t understand basic concepts of the English language.
What is the strategy of continuing to extend the shutdown? What do Dems have to gain? Conservatives have been shutting down more and more of the government since day 1, on purpose. Again, they’re very happy to keep it shut down. “Appeasing” conservatives is KEEPING the govt shut down…