I usually don’t think much of Marc Thiessen’s Washington Post columns but his most recent is an exception:
Good news for the incoming House Democratic majority! They have something President Trump really, really wants: money to build a border wall. Trump is desperate for this money. Mexico won’t give it to him. Only congressional Democrats can. Without their consent, he can’t deliver on one of the key campaign promises he made during the 2016 election.
There’s a name for this in classic negotiating strategy. It’s called “leverage.†Good negotiators use leverage (something they have, which their adversary wants) to obtain what are called “concessions†(something their adversary has, which they want). The result is what experts call “compromise.†This is how the civilized world gets things done.
But in a fit of pique, Democrats are throwing away their leverage, insisting that they will never — under any circumstances — give Trump the wall he so desperately wants. The reason? Because he wants it and they despise him.
There is a name for this in negotiating strategy as well. It’s called “insanity.â€
I would suggest a different word: fanaticism. In that I’m thinking of one of the remarks of that most quotable of 20th century philosophers, George Santayana: “Fanaticism consists in redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim.”
Do read the balance of Mr. Thiessen’s column. It’s a primer in negotiation.
However, assume that the Democratic leadership isn’t insane, fanatical, or mistaken. What is their aim?
They offered full funding for the wall in return for DACA and got turned down, and DACA is something that even most Republicans support. What exactly is this leverage supposed to obtain with a group that doesn’t believe in compromise?
Steve
I wouldn’t give it to him because my idea of America isn’t one thay hides behind a wall. But that’s me.
What is their aim?
A permanent electoral majority, a Black and Brown America led by wrinkled rich Whites. They can’t get it, the electorate is always a moving target.
As to the wall, it’s become a metaphor, five billion won’t build a complete wall anyway, parts of the wall are done, parts never will be. But to Trump, it is a campaign promise. A Wall, reduced to $5 B in personnel and maintenance.
Funding for the wall has not passed because Republicans do not have the votes. It is sad but amusing whenever the party in control blames the other party for what they cannot pass.
With Obamacare, Democrats blamed Republicans for the things they could not pass, and Republicans blamed Democrats for not helping to repeal it.
That none of them see this as a problem is pathetic.
https://youtu.be/dObTXYa-_n4?t=108
“Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book”.
Apparently Mr. Thiessen doesn’t read much. Neither Trump’s book, “The Art of the Deal”, nor Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”. Evidence? “Good news for the incoming House Democratic majority! They have something President Trump really, really wants: money to build a border wall.” Oh really, O’Riley?
Steve:
I thought that the offer was for a wall in exchange for a much-expanded DACA that included a path to citizenship–something that goes considerably beyond President Obama’s executive order.
In Congress that’s called a “poison pill”. It’s an offer that’s meaningless because those making the offer know that it will be rejected in advance.
I can’t think of a single reason to give this guy $20 billion for a wall other than the Dem’s big donors want it. But they don’t.
Then isn’t the wall also a poison pill?
Steve
Only if you take the position that anything the other side wants is completely unacceptable.
So then they both have poison pills now.
Steve