|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Trump Presidency | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Percy wants to say I made up the issues that are at issue.
quote: The issue is about letting people stay. Americans are actually supportive of letting folks stay once they get in(it depends on how the poll question is asked)
quote: quote: The same polls have lots of conflicting answers though. But the above quotes indicate support for allowing illegals to stay. But this 2018 CBS poll shows more anti-immigration sentiment cbs_20180624_nation.pdf - Google Drive There was a new 2019 Gallop poll which shows that a record number support increasing immigration numbers per year. It is the featured poll at the top (see Gallop link), with a timeline graph. It is at 30%. (the polling question was asked January 21-27 2019, but this 2019 poll lacks a secondary question which specifies preferences for LEGAL immigration numbers being increased like the June 1-13 2018 question asked) The 2019 30% support was based on a raw question: "should immigration be kept at its present level, increased or decreased?" The raw question, in June 1-13 of 2018, got 28% support for increasing but the secondary question, with LEGAL specified in the immigration numbers, brought the support for increase up to 34%. The same month (June 2018)say Pew show a poll with LEGAL specified (Pew always specifies LEGAL immigration when asking the question) Shifting Public Views on Legal Immigration Into the U.S. | Pew Research Center The June 5-12 2018 Pew question saw almost identical numbers as the Gallop poll Both June 2018 polls had 38% say "keep levels the same" Pew had a 1% difference in those who wanted to decrease LEGAL levels (24% verses 25%) Pew had 32% favor increasing legal immigration levels (34% in Gallop) So we saw that Gallop, in June 2018, had 6% more support increasing yearly immigration levels when LEGAL IMMIGRATION was asked about verses a simple question about (unspecified with regards to legality of immigrants) immigration levels. 34% verses 28% support. Now the January 2019 Gallop poll does not have the secondary question on LEGAL IMMIGRATION LEVELS, but the raw immigration level question finally broke 30% support for increasing. Perhaps the support for increasing legal immigration levels could now have broken 35%? I think it probably is, finally. I expressed the wish that Democrats would start to favor increasing legal immigration (still well under 50% support among the party) as we get into the 2020 race. My hope is that the question will be a part of the 2020 exit polls in November. I hope 60% of Democrats will support increasing legal immigration (that would be ground breaking enough for 50% to do so), and Republicans stay at their current 22% level (or higher). The 40% mark, for the nation as a whole would be a milestone. The numbers of those who favor Open Borders seem to only slightly trail those who support increasing legal immigration a year (an 8-10% lower number). (See CBS link for 24% support for Open Borders) Can Democrats win with an Open Border position? Minorities will soon (2024-2028) make up 35% of those eligible to vote. 70% support for Democrats, among minorities, would make 24.5% of the total vote to win a race. That would mean whites, at 65% of the vote, would need to give Democrats 39.2% support to get enough total votes to break 50.0% It is time to make the case for Open Borders Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
I will start with the most amazing load of crap he just said:
[quote]
LamarkNewAge:
quote: Percy said:
quote: The slight of hand and b.s. speaks for itself. Do I even need to respond? Hillary Clinton supported WALLS even after Trump announced his anti-immigration platform in the summer of 2015.
quote: [quote]
Hillary Clinton supported a barrier.
quote: Do you ever talk to Hispanic people (I am not)? They know that Reagan and Bush (both Bush's) were pro-immigration. Reagan and Bush 43 can be seen on video (from the late 70s and early 80s) saying Mexicans should be able to travel across the border (and back) without a VISA. In the 1980 Reagan/Carter debate, Reagan defended illegal immigrants as being no different from the other Americans throughout history, coming to work and have a good life. He opposed deporting illegals. And he made it clear. You have a lot of nerve telling somebody they can't look at positions of the party leadership.
quote: The CNN June 2014 interview was from 2014. It was what made headlines. (what are you even talking about, as most of my links were actually dated 2014 as anybody could see?) Hillary supported Obama's policies. As for 2018, Hillary Clinton angered many pro-immigration folks by going to Europe and telling the European governments to reduce (illegal and legal) immigration.
quote: Yet you don't want anybody to even comment on the policies? Somehow, I doubt you cared too much, even if I grant you actually opposed them as you claim.
quote: Actually, I have seen some studies that show Trump deported 30% more, per year, than Obama. So what? So what? So what? The fact that Democrats were super-duper anti-immigration back before Trump won in 2016 is a snoozer? Are you sure you opposed Obama's policies? (For the record, I feel Obama personally was more pro-immigration than his policies would indicate. Politicians just follow the electorate. I have more of a problem with non-politicians opposing immigration-rights, because politicians have to adjust their positions to get elected. Many Democratic politicians have to worry about their positions hurting fellow Democrats who must run in difficult districts and states, even if they can win in their own state/local electorate.) "So what"?
quote: Give me a break. Republicans are actually more pro-immigration than they have ever been. I actually have been looking at polls for a long time. I actually know Charles and David Koch are for Open Borders (as Sanders was happy to point out when he defended his opposition to Open Borders), and always have been. Ruppert Murdoch is very vocally in favor of Open Borders (he loudly talks about the issue, and recently he attacked his former country - Australia - for not having Open Borders) The conservative Wall Street Journal made it clear that they supported Mexico's President in his call for Open Borders in 2001. I was supportive too. And at the very time. (In 1991, I had a Mexican foreign-exchange student thank me for supporting Open Borders, when he heard me talk about it to a fellow high-schooler. We talked about newspapers, platforms, editorials, and other issues) In 2009, I was very angry at Governor Patterson's decision to appoint Gillibrand to Hillary's seat. I was extremely vocal and would even have conversations with over a half-dozen police officers at once about it. Immigration was one major issue, but I was openly amazed (disgusted) that Patterson had the audacity (in 2010)to claim Cuomo supporters only supported the Italian American because Patterson himself was black. I was extremely vocal that he would appoint a young bloond-haired, blue-eyed anti-immigration individual, then try to make race an issue when the Democrats were disgusted with him. (I was back in New York in 2010, not there at all in 2009) I now love Gillibrand, because she NOW ADMITS she supported deportation of illegals due to a severe lack of empathy for others, and now deportation is seen as extremely bad policy by the junior Senator. He appointment was actually one of the best things to have ever happened. (I was just sick at the time though)
quote: Is this how you talk to Republicans? You tell them how much we need a wall? I was always way far more confrontational on immigration (and not just with Republicans). You really support a wall?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
quote: She supported what Obama was doing. And "deportation" (or "deport" the children) was what she said. (I admit that she talked about the issue as rarely as possible, and she in facts, always has to be pushed by the interviewers. She was a woman of few words on immigration, and finding specific sentences from her on all the component parts of the policy is difficult) Deportation is as extreme as it gets though.
quote: Just like Trump but a little better, right?
quote: I can assure you that the Democratic position (whatever it is)will be part of every debate and discussion about the Presidency. Trump will raise good questions about the Democratic position in the debates. This immigration issue might be seen as utilitarian to many Democrats, but this is the issue of issues and it will be until we have Open Borders. There is the Trump position. Then there is the Democratic "position" (yet to be determined). You want to debate which type of hard border we should have. I am only in favor of a soft border, and really there are only 2 real positions: 1 Trump's hard border (which isn't any different from the post 1986 status quo) 2 A soft border.
quote: Beto actually supports taking down the El Paso wall. (I hadn't kept up with his recent change of position, but just found out he flipped)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
HC is Hillary Clinton
BS is Bernie Sanders JR is Jorge Ramos quote: This was the 2016 Hillary position. Here was the relevant 2014 position
quote: 2014 on CNN “They should be sent back as soon as it can be determined who the responsible adults in their family are because there are concerns about whether all of them can be sent back, but I think all of them that can be should be reunited with their families,” she said, adding that the United States must do more to confront the violence in the region and strengthen border security. “But we have to send a clear message that ”Just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean your child gets to stay. We don’t want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or encourage more children to make that dangerous journey.” Percy should email the pro-immigration leaders from my New York Post article if he cares about current interpretations of Hillary and Sanders. Page not found | New York Post Muzaffar Chishti, director of the Migration Policy Institute’s office at New York University School of Law. Thanu Yakupitiyage, from the New York Immigration Coalition Cristobal Alex, president of the Latino Victory Project
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Here is the link to the New York Post article which has 3 pro-immigration experts attempt to interpret the March 9, 2016 Hillary Clinton liver entrail.
Immigration experts have no idea what Hillary is talking about It was Bush 41 (not 43, as I said earlier) who can be seen on video agreeing with Ronald Reagan on Open Borders between Mexico and the United States. Naturally, Reagan and Bush 41 were "elites", and not representative of average people in the United States. (this is an example of where average people are wrong to oppose Open Borders) Trump has severely attacked David and Charles Koch on immigration, essentially saying they don't represent Republicans, and are a "joke". (Koch brothers are essentially Rand Paul types but pro immigration )
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Several questions.
1) What are "elites"? 2) Was Bush 41 and Reagan discussing NAFTA? Open borders in regards to trade but not literally? 3) What does George Soros think? I am a political moderate. I see that some view Soros as evil and others view the Koch Brothers as evil. How many people see both as evil? (Rich people in general)Based on that theory, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, two generous billionaires, are evil. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
When Reagan Wanted Open Borders and Clinton Didn't - Latino USA
https://search.yahoo.com/...dmlkZW8EdF9zdG1wAzE1NTI3Njk3Njc- Ronald Reagan calls for an open border with Mexico, 1980 ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUXXw6xr4gI During a 1980 debate with George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan called for illegal immigrants to get work permits and for the U.S. to have an open border with Mexico. Category People & Blogs George H. W. Bush And Ronald Reagan Debate On Immigration In ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan answer a question from the audience about illegal immigration at a primary debate sponsored by the League of Woman voters and moderated by Howard K Smith in 1980. When Reagan Wanted Open Borders and Clinton Didn't - Latino USAlatinousa.org/2015/10/06/when-reagan-wanted-open... When Reagan Wanted Open Borders and Clinton Didn’t ... Here are two video clips from a 1980 Republican presidential primary debate. ... linking to the Reagan-Bush ... Did Ronald Reagan Try for Eight Years to Build a Border Wall?Did Ronald Reagan Try for Eight Years to Build a Border Wall? | Snopes.com... And open the border both ways by understanding their problems. This is the only safety valve they have with that unemployment that probably keeps the lid from blowing off down there. Ronald Reagan Backed Open Borders & Amnesty - jimheath.tvjimheath.tv/2019/01/ronald-reagan-backed-open... The border, he said, should be open “both ways” ” and border security policy should take into account the economic challenges facing Mexico. Here is the video of Reagan making the above statement: You Will Not Believe How Reagan Talked About Immigration ...thinkprogress.org/you-will-not-believe-how... You Will Not Believe How Reagan Talked About Immigration During The 1980 GOP Presidential Debate ... between Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, ... of our mutual problems?” “Open the borders ... Reagan's Shining City on a Hill Didn't Have 'Open Borders'Reagan's Shining City on a Hill Didn't Have 'Open Borders'... Reagan’s Shining City on a Hill Didn’t Have ”Open Borders’ ... George W. Bush’s administration, Meese flatly declared that the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, which granted ... Ronald Reagan on Open Borders | Mary L. G. Therouxblog.independent.org/.../09/29/ronald-reagan-on-open-borders And open the border both ways by understanding their problems. Update: Here’s the video of the exchange between Bush and Reagan: Mary L. G. Theroux is Senior Vice President of the Independent Institute. Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush on Immigration in 1980 ...Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush on Immigration in 1980 Republican Presidential Debate... Future president George H.W. Bush, some guy who never gets to talk, and the patron saint of modern conservatism, Ronald Reagan. From the get-go, you know this is not a 2016 debate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Yep, we're just too damn good for this world. We do what we want. Go suck it!
Who needs 'emEschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
According to the BBC, it’s with the Department of Justice. It should make U.S. politics more interesting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
Robert Mueller Submits Report On Russia Investigation to Attorney General Barr
quote: What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8
|
given that there hasn't been an indictment since Stone I don't have my hopes up that this will deliver a killing blow to rump's presidency. My thinking is that if Mueller had anything substantial on the cheeto in chief but was following the DoJ's policy of "sitting presidents can't be indicted" that kush or one of the boys would have received indictments before the report was completed.
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
This past 3 years since Shit-for-Brains announced he was running has lowered my expectations so far that I think he will get away with everything, no matter what it is. He has been doing a lot of his bullshit defiantly right out in the open. The republicans all think he shits chocolate syrup.
What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
The republicans all think he shits chocolate syrup. Well, he did bring them closer to the rise of the alt-right which appears to be an increasing source of votes in this country.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
The letter from Attorney General William P. Barr to ranking members of Congress summarizing the findings of the Mueller report can be found here: Barr Letter on the Mueller Report
Here is a very short summary of Barr letter content:
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1504 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
No collusion yet everybody lied when it came to talking to the Russians.
The obstruction question is still on the table even though the DOJ says he is exonerated. Congress is going to not let this go until every possible shred is looked at. Im glad Trump was cleared from collusion. I am not so sure he was not being obstructionist. So is this the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end.? "You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024