Hi CBJ,
I say option 3.
Don't compromise with the left. You get no credit or compromise from them.

Option 3 would be wonderful and make Obama look like the ass he is. When there was a "shutdown" under Obama's watch the government went to great lengths to make it as painful as possible closing parks that didn't need extra money to stay open, putting cones on the roadside 'closing' the view etc.

If the Dems shut the government down, Trump can do what every business does when it is running short -- prioritize spending the revenue that is available. He might have to lay off areas he doesn't want anyway but you can bet he won't make a point of making it painful.

Simple solution: No negotiations with terrorists.

However, I agree with you CBJ, the con-gress is filled with gutless, statist looting eunuchs. The cowards will continue to waste the peoples' scarce resources until the country is as bankrupt as Bernie Madoff.

I think Trump would hesitate to use option 3, the government “shutdown”, because of the possibility he would receive most of the blame for any inconvenience and hardship it may cause. On the other hand, option 1 (the “compromise” option) would make him appear weak and would not go over well with most of his hard-core supporters. I think Trump might actually favor option 2, the “trillion dollar coin”, as it would solve the short-term budget crisis while neutralizing any leverage the Democrats might have for influencing Trump’s budget priorities.

I just wish California would succeed just to see an end to Felony Pelosi, and New York fall into a big hole so we don't need to hear from Schumar again...it just gets so crass after a while...almost as bad as HillaryBeasts whining..

It may well be that a government shut down turns out to be beneficial. After all, the example of a doctor's strike a number of years ago showed that the number of hospital deaths dropped significantly. Washington may not get anything done, but that will include not getting the bad and stupid things that Washington is prone to perform, not getting done as well.

There's another option: another "nuclear" rule change that makes passage of spending bills by simple majority vote allowed. Some would object to changing the Senate into a near twin of the House, but radicalism has pretty much destroyed the elements of what was once the center of real debate and compromise into a platform for political posturing and little accomplishment.

CBJ, I would say your analysis is correct, option 1 is most likely, given their performance to date and the Healthcare debacle as an example of their total inability to get behind an issue. Option 2 is just smoke and mirrors, almost as if they wrote a law to allow for smoke and mirrors, which begins to head down the road of a shadow government funding itself with fake money (or the idea that all money is fake to start with). Option 3 has no hope of happening, given the Dumbocraps apparent control of the media, total lack of knowledge and facts used by their supporters, and the sheer volume of crying and whining they generate. No one has the cuhones to tell them to STFU and go to your safe space.

A government shut down would be great. Turn off the spigot to unwanted bureaucracies, all of them. I like what a friend of mine suggested many years ago, turn off the air conditioning and heating, make it uncomfortable to work there. It should be a part time job working only a few months a year and mandatory to spend the rest of their time with their constituents with an office they have to man personally where people can talk with them directly. They should be working less than 30 hours a week so taxpayers don't have to pay for their healthcare. Let their healthcare costs go up ten times and their deductibles increase 70 times like mine did and pay for it with a minimum wage part time salary.

Realistically, shutting down the government doesn't really mean much, especially if Trump skips the jackass Obama tactic of putting fences up around monuments and paying park rangers to stand there and tell people they can't look at the monument.

Just shut it down if that is what it takes.

As others have pointed out, a shutdown just plays right into Republicans' hands with a Republican President. And it will be hard for even the leftist media to spin this where the Democrats are the minority party.

I hope the government does shut down. That will mean they can't do anymore damage than has already been done and if we are lucky it never opens again.

A government shutdown is great in theory. Unfortunately they provide each employee with retroactive back pay for the duration of the shutdown. We save nothing but we do waste a lot of productive time.

I say shut it all down.

How can Democrats shutdown the government when the Republicans CONTROL BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE?!!!

The article and OP are based on the false premises. With no Democratic involvement, President Trump presented a budget with same growth in spending as previously planned. He and other Republicans talked, then, about doubling borrowing, bringing it back to the ranges of 2009 when Democrats controlled the gov't. The parties basically agree on borrowing and spending, except the Republicans want that same level of borrowing during an expansion, meaning very dangerous levels of deficit during the next recession. But the parties are in the same neighborhood on the issue-- major borrowing and spending.

Contrary to that the OP suggests, the article says Democrats what to change slightly what the gov't does with all this newly increased borrowing. Apparently Democrats are mostly okay with gov't spending and doing it with borrowing, they just want it spent on things that get them elected. The article says Democrats have "privately floated the idea" they might agree to Republicans' borrowing and spending as long as they get their spending too. I find it disgusting.

So the OP says, what to do; what to do. It would be great fun to see one side get their money. Commenters want to see them figure out a way to make President Obama look bad.

What would be fun for me is their actually reducing spending and borrowing, me not to be sending $25k to the Treasury because my quarterly ESs last year were not enough. Despite all this baloney, all mainstream politicians agree on massive spending and borrowing. So we just bump up our quarterlies; Q1 is due next week. :(

I wish people who found great fun in arguing over the crumbs of the Federal budget, crumbs since there's no debate about dismantling the global empire, Social Security, or the prison industrial complex, would get their jollies some other way, I don't know maybe hurting animals or something, and leave the world to people who want to reduce gov't.