Nancy Pelosi is in a staredown with Donald Trump over the building of a wall along parts of our southern border. Pelosi has the support of Democrats, the media, progressives, and anti-Trump Republicans. Trump has the support of some Republicans and his ego. So I would argue that Trump has more support than Pelosi.

Trump is pushing this because it’s one of his campaign promises, but also apparently because he thinks border security is an important problem facing American citizens. Pelosi has spoken in favor of a wall in the past, but in her current political situation, it makes more sense for her to oppose the wall, President Trump, and her own former statements. Politics can put people into awkward positions sometimes. It happens.

So in this staredown, who will blink first? I find it exceedingly unlikely that Trump will back down. First of all, that’s not his style. He may negotiate and meet her halfway (and he has publicly offered to do exactly that already), but he will not abandon his cause. Suppose he loses more and more Republican support as the government shutdown becomes more politically difficult over time – I just don’t think that will matter. Trump was elected without the support of the Republican establishment. He’ll take their support where he can get it, but he’s certainly not dependent on it. And anyone who looks back on Trump’s life will find many character flaws, but they will not find that he is prone to crippling self-doubt. He’s just not going to back down. All he has to do is say, “I’m doing this for the good of American citizens. If Pelosi has her way, American citizens will get hurt.” That is a plausible position. He doesn’t have to back down.

What about Pelosi? First of all, she’s a political animal. She is in her position solely because of the support of her political allies. If they start to get cold feet, she’ll find herself in a very awkward position very quickly. She may then be forced to appeal to them by pointing out the reasons for her opposition to the wall, but that will quickly become even more awkward. What will she say?

She could say that if the government shutdown persists, then hundreds of thousands of government workers will not get their paychecks. These people will get hurt more and more the longer this goes on.

So what happens if she agrees to the wall? Well, all those government workers start getting paid, so they’d be happy.

But she can’t back down. She just can’t agree to the wall. Why not? Well, Pelosi would say that people will get hurt if she agrees to the wall. But here’s the trick: Who are those people? I’m not sure how she would answer that.

It’s obvious that if she agrees to the wall, there will be some happy government workers, because they’ll get paid. But who will be unhappy?

Illegal immigrants. They’re the only ones I can think of who will be hurt by the construction of a wall along parts of our southern border. It won’t hurt legal immigrants – they don’t enter the country by sneaking through the desert. It won’t hurt American citizens – it will help them. It won’t hurt government workers – it will help them – they’ll finally get paid.

So the only people who will be hurt if Pelosi agrees to a wall are illegal immigrants. They are the only reason she cannot agree to the wall. So illegal immigrants are apparently more important to Pelosi than government workers, or American citizens in general. I would think that this would put an elected official into an awkward position.

I would also think this bargain would be a tough sell for Pelosi to maintain her support. And if those who support her start to figure this out, I think Pelosi may have no choice but to agree to the wall.

I also suspect that Trump has already figured all this out, and he knows that he’s negotiating from a position of strength. He won’t back down. Because he doesn’t have to. And he knows it.

I suspect Pelosi knows it, too. I’m pretty sure Chuck Schumer knows it. Pelosi may be as stupid as she sounds, although that seems unlikely. But Schumer is not stupid. They’re in an impossible situation. Surely they must see that as clearly as Trump and everyone else does.

Sometimes a bluff works in a game of poker, even if you have no cards in your hand. But that only works if everybody else can’t see your cards.

It seems to me that Pelosi and Schumer are bluffing even though everybody in the game knows they have a losing hand. That seems like odd behavior for professional politicians. So perhaps I’m missing something.

What do you think?