Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer continues to try and block President Trump any way he can. This week, he hinted at a plan he has to try and block the construction of Trump’s wall.
Trump will require 60 votes in the Senate to fund the wall, but the Republicans only have 52 members in the Senate. It is also unlikely that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will be able to persuade 8 Democrats to vote in favor of it.
However, Senate Republicans could invoke the “nuclear option” and bypass the filibuster all together.
Schumer was “betting the Republican leader won’t be willing to undermine such a fundamental Senate tradition just to pay for Trump’s wall.”
Conservative Tribune reports:
Given McConnell’s penchant for fecklessness, it appeared Schumer had made the correct bet, though moving forward with it could be disastrous for the Democrat Party.
A recent poll by the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research showed that nearly half of Americans believed “illegal immigration is extremely or very threatening to the country,” suggesting therefore that any efforts by Schumer to stop Trump from reducing illegal immigration could potentially be met with serious voter backlash.
And were this backlash to follow the Democrats to the 2018 midterm elections, it could cause Republicans to gain the seats needed for a 60-vote majority, as noted by Breitbart, which added that the GOP was “already in a very good position to gain several additional Senate seats” even without it.
According to Axious, “A second source familiar with the administration’s thinking said that even if Democrats block funding, the administration will find ways to get by in the short term.”
“We have enough money to get a decent amount of the wall done in first year,” the source claimed. “We can re-prioritize some funding within (the Department of Homeland Security) … It’s not like work would come to a complete halt.”
Regardless of how Schumer plays the situation, his party will lose and he will damage his reputation. Sounds like an easy win for the Republicans.