![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Shutdowns and negotiations
To summarize my understanding of things...
Trump's approach to negotiating has historically been (a) develop as much leverage as possible before going into negotiations; (b) demand everything and give away very little; (c) after the agreement is signed, renege on whatever you agreed to give away, and dare the other side to sue you for it.
Congressional Democrats' position for the past two weeks has been "let's reopen the government, and then take a month or so to negotiate on border control. In those negotiations, we'll give you some of what you want in exchange for some of what we want." Which makes perfectly good sense if you assume that a functioning government is good for both sides, and that all parties are interested in negotiated compromise.
Donald Trump's position is "let's negotiate now, with much of the Federal government not functioning; I'll allow the government to reopen in exchange for you giving me everything I asked for on border control." Which makes perfectly good sense if you assume that Democrats care about the Federal government functioning while Trump and Republicans don't: it's not a shared goal but a bargaining chip in Trump's pile, and the only chip he intends to offer.
There's some legitimate basis for the latter assumption. First, national Republicans for the past forty years have been running on the idea that government cannot function productively, so they have little to lose and a lot to gain by making it fail (although by shutting it down, they risk Americans realizing how much good it was doing them). Second, if the contest is "who cares less about the suffering of ordinary people," Donald Trump will always win that contest.
Besides, Donald Trump doesn't believe in "good for both sides". Every deal is zero-sum: either you win and I lose, or I win and you lose. This dispute is no longer about a few billion dollars for wall construction; it's about forcing a showdown, winning it, and making the Democrats lose, on the theory that it will weaken their negotiating position on everything else (in particular, investigating and possibly impeaching him) for the next two years. The Democrats, of course, know this; they would almost certainly be willing to authorize a few billion dollars for a few miles of useless wall if that's what it took to get something else important, but they're not willing to start their two-year Congressional term with a high-profile loss.
So it's crucially important to both sides to not be seen as giving in. Most members of Congress (at least those who have been there more than ten years or so) are familiar with the idea of compromise, of finding a deal that saves face for both sides. But Trump is certainly not interested in mutual face-saving, and even if Chuck and Nancy are (not entirely clear), it takes both sides to reach such a deal. Trump will not accept any deal that doesn't humiliate Chuck and Nancy, and they won't accept any deal that does.
So nothing will be accomplished until conditions change dramatically, e.g. a major shift in public opinion one way or the other, or three Republican Senators demanding a vote on reopening the government.
Trump's approach to negotiating has historically been (a) develop as much leverage as possible before going into negotiations; (b) demand everything and give away very little; (c) after the agreement is signed, renege on whatever you agreed to give away, and dare the other side to sue you for it.
Congressional Democrats' position for the past two weeks has been "let's reopen the government, and then take a month or so to negotiate on border control. In those negotiations, we'll give you some of what you want in exchange for some of what we want." Which makes perfectly good sense if you assume that a functioning government is good for both sides, and that all parties are interested in negotiated compromise.
Donald Trump's position is "let's negotiate now, with much of the Federal government not functioning; I'll allow the government to reopen in exchange for you giving me everything I asked for on border control." Which makes perfectly good sense if you assume that Democrats care about the Federal government functioning while Trump and Republicans don't: it's not a shared goal but a bargaining chip in Trump's pile, and the only chip he intends to offer.
There's some legitimate basis for the latter assumption. First, national Republicans for the past forty years have been running on the idea that government cannot function productively, so they have little to lose and a lot to gain by making it fail (although by shutting it down, they risk Americans realizing how much good it was doing them). Second, if the contest is "who cares less about the suffering of ordinary people," Donald Trump will always win that contest.
Besides, Donald Trump doesn't believe in "good for both sides". Every deal is zero-sum: either you win and I lose, or I win and you lose. This dispute is no longer about a few billion dollars for wall construction; it's about forcing a showdown, winning it, and making the Democrats lose, on the theory that it will weaken their negotiating position on everything else (in particular, investigating and possibly impeaching him) for the next two years. The Democrats, of course, know this; they would almost certainly be willing to authorize a few billion dollars for a few miles of useless wall if that's what it took to get something else important, but they're not willing to start their two-year Congressional term with a high-profile loss.
So it's crucially important to both sides to not be seen as giving in. Most members of Congress (at least those who have been there more than ten years or so) are familiar with the idea of compromise, of finding a deal that saves face for both sides. But Trump is certainly not interested in mutual face-saving, and even if Chuck and Nancy are (not entirely clear), it takes both sides to reach such a deal. Trump will not accept any deal that doesn't humiliate Chuck and Nancy, and they won't accept any deal that does.
So nothing will be accomplished until conditions change dramatically, e.g. a major shift in public opinion one way or the other, or three Republican Senators demanding a vote on reopening the government.