Flip-Flop: Trump gambles that no one has any short term memory on immigration

[Bethere]

yeah, on O'Reily he was saying that current processes and current laws were the way he was going to go.

Who here remember him talking about a wall, extreme vetting, etc.

?http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/22/trump-reveals-little-deportation-strategy-oreilly-factor/89129066/

“Now, the existing laws are very strong," Trump said. "The existing laws, the first thing we’re gonna do, if and when I win, is we’re gonna get rid of all of the bad ones. We’ve got gang members, we have killers, we have a lot of bad people that have to get out of this country ... they're gonna be out of this country so fast your head will spin."Then, he added: "What people don't know is that (President) Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country" and that former President George W. Bush did the same.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-immigration-stance-flip-flop-227260

Donald Trump and his surrogates on Monday pushed back against the idea that the Republican presidential nominee is softening his hard-line positions on immigration, with Trump himself insisting there has been no “flip-flopping” on his part.

The campaign has found itself on the defensive after BuzzFeed reported over the weekend that Trump had indicated an openness to legalization for undocumented immigrants and after his new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said Trump’s use of a deportation force is “to be determined.”


Ladies and Gentlemen. Your thoughts?

[Mac-7]

ML
yeah, on O'Reily he was saying that current processes and current laws were the way he was going to go.

Who here remember him talking about a wall, extreme vetting, etc.

?http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/22/trump-reveals-little-deportation-strategy-oreilly-factor/89129066/

“Now, the existing laws are very strong," Trump said. "The existing laws, the first thing we’re gonna do, if and when I win, is we’re gonna get rid of all of the bad ones. We’ve got gang members, we have killers, we have a lot of bad people that have to get out of this country ... they're gonna be out of this country so fast your head will spin."Then, he added: "What people don't know is that (President) Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country" and that former President George W. Bush did the same.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-immigration-stance-flip-flop-227260

Donald Trump and his surrogates on Monday pushed back against the idea that the Republican presidential nominee is softening his hard-line positions on immigration, with Trump himself insisting there has been no “flip-flopping” on his part.

The campaign has found itself on the defensive after BuzzFeed reported over the weekend that Trump had indicated an openness to legalization for undocumented immigrants and after his new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said Trump’s use of a deportation force is “to be determined.”


Ladies and Gentlemen. Your thoughts?

My reaction is that the alternstive to trump that liberals and washington insiders push was pro amnesty pro open borders jeb bush and john kasich.

and now the choice is trump or the most corrupt person to run for president since warren g harding.

a woman who is for instant amnesty and open borders

[zelmo1234]

While this seems like a huge change in policy, it is really not that far off. Trump has in fact from the beginning called for the enforcing of current laws and the Compassionate removal of illegals.

However;

When you take into account that the left has been lying about what Trump has been saying? Well then you think that he has changed from Deporting anyone and everyone that was even Friends with a Mexican, to his current policy.

[Bethere]

L

My reaction is that the alternstive to trump that liberals and washington insiders oush was pro amnesty pro open borders jeb bush and john kasich.

and now the choice is trmp or the most corrupt person to run for president sibpnce warren g harding.

a woman who is also for instant amnesty and open borders

are you ok?

[Mac-7]

are you ok?

Its your breathless expose of trump not mine.

so the real question is are YOU ok?

[Bethere]

Its your breathless expose of trump not mine.

so the real question is are YOU ok?

I asked you first.

[Mac-7]

I asked you first.

The topic is trump isnt it?

Not me?

[Bethere]

While this seems like a huge change in policy, it is really not that far off. Trump has in fact from the beginning called for the enforcing of current laws and the Compassionate removal of illegals.

However;

When you take into account that the left has been lying about what Trump has been saying? Well then you think that he has changed from Deporting anyone and everyone that was even Friends with a Mexican, to his current policy.

You don't have any problems with his conflicting assessments that "the borders are a sieve" and now it's, "Obama deported a shocking amount of people."

And adopting current laws and procedures is hardly locking down our borders--or is it?

[Bethere]

The topic is trump isnt it?

Not me?
absolutely. What do you feel about extreme vetting? How is it similar to our current policies, procedures, and laws?

[Mac-7]

absolutely. What do you feel about extreme vetting? How is it similar to our current policies, procedures, and laws?

You asked for my thoughts on trump and I gave them to you.

now you want to talk about me not trump

[Bethere]

You asked for my thoughts on trump and I gave them to you.

now you want to talk about me not trump

do you know what extreme vetting is?

it's not about you!

[Mac-7]

do you know what extreme vetting is?

!

I know extreme vetting does not affect anyone already in this country legally

[Bethere]

I know extreme vetting does not affect anyone already in this country legally
well, now it doesn't affect anyone as it was just made up trump nonsense in the first place and if you don't mind, he'd like you to forget that you ever heard the term.

pete and chris like to talk about how this election is about nationalism v the status quo. tonight, trump made it clear that he thinks the status quo rocks. he's no more of a nationalist than obammy is.

[Mac-7]

well, now it doesn't affect anyone as it was just made up trump nonsense in the first place and if you don't mind, he'd like you to forget that you ever heard the term.

pete and chris like to talk about how this election is about nationalism v the status quo. tonight, trump made it clear that he thinks the status quo rocks. he's no more of a nationalist than obammy is.

If it doesn't affect anyone why are you so bothered by it?

[Bethere]

If it doesn't affect anyone why are you so bothered by it?

I'm not. But if you trump folks actually care about what he's been preaching for the last year you would have to be concerned.

My suspicion is that most of you will support him no matter what position he assumes because he is the republican nominee. it's not driven by nationalism v status quo or any other false ideological construct.

It's 100% partisan politics as always.

No one is fooled--except for half of the posters here at tPF.

[Peter1469]

Is he for gay marriage yet? If he is like Obama it won't be until he runs for his second term for that flip flop.

[Bethere]

Is he for gay marriage yet? If he is like Obama it won't be until he runs for his second term for that flip flop.

Stay on topic.

[Mac-7]

I'm not.

But if you trump folks actually care about what he's been preaching for the last year you would have to be concerned.

My suspicion is that most of you will support him no matter what position he assumes because he is the republican nominee. it's not driven by nationalism v status quo or any other false ideological construct.

It's 100% partisan politics as always.

No one is fooled--except for half of the posters here at tPF.

If you are not a trump folk why do you care what we care about?

[zelmo1234]

You don't have any problems with his conflicting assessments that "the borders are a sieve" and now it's, "Obama deported a shocking amount of people."

And adopting current laws and procedures is hardly locking down our borders--or is it?

I have no problem with him addressing the fact that Obama did deport a lot of people, So did GWB, but not nearly enough.

I have no issue with him saying that the first thing we are going to do is enforce the laws on the books. Which of course will cut of federal aid and deport those that are caught.

And I have NO issue with a candidate changing their stance as they learn more about the situation.

For example you have Hillary that is now supporting Free College Education, and against the TPP.

If she is elected, both of those are going to change back to her original stance, you know it, I know it and the world knows it but the press will protect her on it.

[zelmo1234]

I'm not. But if you trump folks actually care about what he's been preaching for the last year you would have to be concerned.

My suspicion is that most of you will support him no matter what position he assumes because he is the republican nominee. it's not driven by nationalism v status quo or any other false ideological construct.

It's 100% partisan politics as always.

No one is fooled--except for half of the posters here at tPF.

I will support him, until such a point as he becomes worse for the nation than Hillary.

Now what you and I consider bad for the nation is likely 2 different things. And that is OK.

But Hillary has proven that she is not to be trusted with National Security. Until such a time that Trump is worse than that? He will be getting my vote, as bad as he is.

[FindersKeepers]

Ladies and Gentlemen. Your thoughts?

He's moderating in the general.

This was predicted.

[MisterVeritis]

It is too soon to tell.

Fifteen thousand Clinton emails will be released this week. The Trump Team wants to focus on those this week. In my opinion, this is the right focus.

On immigration, the wall will be built. Illegals will be deported. The goals are the same. I predict his plan will involve a phased approach. Gang members and other convicted and charged criminals get the boot first. Existing immigration laws will be enforced.

[Mac-7]

It is too soon to tell.

Fifteen thousand Clinton emails will be released this week. The Trump Team wants to focus on those this week. In my opinion, this is the right focus.

On immigration, the wall will be built. Illegals will be deported. The goals are the same. I predict his plan will involve a phased approach. Gang members and other convicted and charged criminals get the boot first. Existing immigration laws will be enforced.

Im touched that liberals like the op care so much for trump voters like us and dont want us to be disappointed if he is elected

[Jets]

Its true that a majority of voters tend to suffer from short term memory, but this is too close to the election to attempt this rhetoric.

imo

[MisterVeritis]

Its true that a majority of voters tend to suffer from short term memory, but this is too close to the election to attempt this rhetoric.

imo
Who, in your opinion, is attempting "this rhetoric?"

[Jets]

Who, in your opinion, is attempting "this rhetoric?"

Donald Trump. By rhetoric I mean as one definition:

Rhetoric is the art of discourse, an art that aims to improve the capability of writers or speakers to inform, most likely to persuade, or motivate particular audiences in specific situations.

Rhetoric - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric

[Bethere]

Im touched that liberals like the op care so much for trump voters like us and dont want us to be disappointed if he is elected

The OP wants you and your Trump supporter friends to be disappointed in November. Believe me!

[MisterVeritis]

Donald Trump. By rhetoric I mean as one definition:

Rhetoric is the art of discourse, an art that aims to improve the capability of writers or speakers to inform, most likely to persuade, or motivate particular audiences in specific situations.

Rhetoric - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric
He is not the one making the claims. Leftists are.

[MisterVeritis]

The OP wants you and your Trump supporter friends to be disappointed in November. Believe me!
We will be fine, thanks.

[Bethere]

Its true that a majority of voters tend to suffer from short term memory, but this is too close to the election to attempt this rhetoric.

imo

I agree. I think he gets spanked for this.

But the TRUMP FANS will be exposed. They won't care.

[Bethere]

He is not the one making the claims. Leftists are.

Of course he is making claims. Immigration has been the centerpiece of his run for the gop nomination.

Instead of chaos, trump now sees quality work being done by Obama on immigration. He said so. He thinks the laws are sufficient. He likes the current processes.

Trump fans are left to twist in the wind, like a trump contractor would except that they don't even get pennies on the dollar.

[Bethere]

We will be fine, thanks.

Outstanding, but if you don't mind, we'll be hiding the sharp objects anyway.

[MisterVeritis]

Of course he is making claims. Immigration has been the centerpiece of his run for the gop nomination.

Instead of chaos, trump now sees quality work being done by Obama on immigration. He said so. He thinks the laws are sufficient. He likes the current processes.

Trump fans are left to twist in the wind, like a trump contractor would except that they don't even get pennies on the dollar.
You misstate. It won't work.

[MisterVeritis]

Outstanding, but if you don't mind, we'll be hiding the sharp objects anyway.
For yourselves? Absolutely! I recommend it.

[MisterVeritis]

I agree. I think he gets spanked for this.

But the TRUMP FANS will be exposed. They won't care.
Relax. Nothing has changed.

[Bethere]

For yourselves? Absolutely! I recommend it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgB-3aANe0

[Bethere]

He's moderating in the general.

This was predicted.

He's a very 'flexible' guy by his own admission.

[MisterVeritis]

He's a very 'flexible' guy by his own admission.
Patton spoke of this. he said something like, be firm on your goals but flexible in your tactics.

Securing the border and eliminating illegal aliens is the goal.

[Bethere]

Patton spoke of this. he said something like, be firm on your goals but flexible in your tactics.

Securing the border and eliminating illegal aliens is the goal.

P.T. Barnum spoke to this as well.

[MisterVeritis]

P.T. Barnum spoke to this as well.
It won't take very long in Trump's presidency to see which of us is right.

Given the two prior requests for proposal the government should be able to put out a new RFP 90 days after they are directed to do so.

A phased approach might be appropriate. Phase 1 could request a thin defense beginning with the most troublesome sectors. Phase two could add walls and command centers. Easy Peasy.

[Bethere]

It won't take very long in Trump's presidency to see which of us is right.

Given the two prior requests for proposal the government should be able to put out a new RFP 90 days after they are directed to do so.

A phased approach might be appropriate. Phase 1 could request a thin defense beginning with the most troublesome sectors. Phase two could add walls and command centers. Easy Peasy.

Trump fans will never get a chance to find out how right I am on this because the clown will never see the inside of the white house unless he is on a guided public tour, or he is invited to dinner by the Clintons.

In the end, in the privacy of your own home, you will secretly admit that bethere was right all along.

And that is good enough for me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faWRUevPHno

[MisterVeritis]

Trump fans will never get a chance to find out how right I am on this because the clown will never see the inside of the white house unless he is on a guided public tour, or he is invited to dinner by the Clintons.

In the end, in the privacy of your own home, you will secretly admit that bethere was right all along.

And that is good enough for me.
Despite your beliefs this evening, I believe you will enjoy the Trump presidency.
You will vacation at his Southern Wall.

[FindersKeepers]

He's a very 'flexible' guy by his own admission.



Aren't they all?

Politicians, I mean?

[Bethere]

Despite your beliefs this evening, I believe you will enjoy the Trump presidency.
You will vacation at his Southern Wall.

reread toffler's classic. It is the best book on 21st century poli sci ever written--some thirty five years before hand.

Meanwhile, Dr. Bethere prescribes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH5qJNl8qDM

[Bethere]

Aren't they all?

Politicians, I mean?

True, but some are more brazen than others.

In this case, it would be like Uncle Adolph celebrating passover with his Jewish friends; or Custer smokin' peace pipe around the camp fire at Little Big Horn.

[MisterVeritis]

reread toffler's classic. It is the best book on 21st century poli sci ever written--some thirty five years before hand.

Meanwhile, Dr. Bethere prescribes:


Yes. I read it. Apparently so have Obama and all of his henchmen. Alinsky certainly saw the value of accelerating disorganization through change and overload. Since Alinsky died about the same time Future Shock was published, I doubt he read it.

Much of what Obama does is designed to overwhelm us as policy. We can never catch up as illegal act after illegal act occurs, day after day, week after week, month after month. The Congress, which has the authority and the power to shut down the tyrant fails to act.

Hence Trump.

[hanger4]

And adopting current laws and procedures is hardly locking down our borders--or is it?

It would be if the law was being enforced.

Secure Fence Act of 2006

Who was it that said follow the law ??

[FindersKeepers]

True, but some are more brazen than others.

In this case, it would be like Uncle Adolph celebrating passover with his Jewish friends; or Custer smokin' peace pipe around the camp fire at Little Big Horn.

LOL

Methinks you doth protest just a bit much.

[Bethere]

It would be if the law was being enforced.

Secure Fence Act of 2006

Who was it that said follow the law ??

Yeah, that surely addresses extreme vetting, denying entry to half of the world until he can determine who is cool enough to be here, rounding up the illegals with deportation teams, and the like.

you are a big fan of Trump's, why don't you just admit it?

[Bethere]

LOL

Methinks you doth protest just a bit much.

Really? I am not the one who is calling for secession, or talking about living off the grid, or screaming about storing enough ammo.

The GOP is scary because they are so totally frightened.

[Bethere]

Yes. I read it. Apparently so have Obama and all of his henchmen. Alinsky, certainly saw the value of accelerating disorganization through change and overload. Since Alinsky died about the same time Future Shock was published, I doubt he read it.

Much of what Obama does is designed to overwhelm us as policy. We can never catch up as illegal act after illegal act occurs, day after day, week after week, month after month. The Congress, which has the authority and the power to shut down the tyrant fails to act.

Hence Trump.

Change is happening at a rate that is too fast for you to process. You, indeed, suffer from future shock.

[MisterVeritis]

Yeah, that surely addresses extreme vetting, denying entry to half of the world until he can determine who is cool enough to be here, rounding up the illegals with deportation teams, and the like.

you are a big fan of Trump's, why don't you just admit it?
Vetting has to do with bringing in Muslims and IslamoNAZIs. Vetting has nothing to do with illegal aliens.
Halting Muslim immigration from hostile Muslims nations is a common-sense thing to do. No democrat could have thought of it.

A deportation force might not be necessary. Trump listens to advice. Let's see what happens. Enforcing existing laws is a good start. No Democrat could have thought of it.

[MisterVeritis]

Change is happening at a rate that is too fast for you to process. You, indeed, suffer from future shock.
I do quite well, actually.

When I was hiring engineers I frequently asked candidates how they kept up. No one had a good answer.

[MisterVeritis]

Really? I am not the one who is calling for secession, or talking about living off the grid, or screaming about storing enough ammo.

The GOP is scary because they are so totally frightened.
Who is doing that?

[Bethere]

Who is doing that?

You haven't noticed all of the preppers on this site?

[hanger4]

Yeah, that surely addresses extreme vetting, denying entry to half of the world until he can determine who is cool enough to be here, rounding up the illegals with deportation teams, and the like.

you are a big fan of Trump's, why don't you just admit it?

Trump’s ‘extreme vetting’ is harsh, but it would be legal

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/08/16/trumps-extreme-vetting-is-harsh-but-it-would-be-legal/?utm_term=.b23a8190aac0

I've already told you how much of a fan I am of da Donald. Do try and keep up.

[MisterVeritis]

You haven't noticed all of the preppers on this site?
No. I haven't.

Being prepared does not always mean Prepping.

[Bethere]

Trump’s ‘extreme vetting’ is harsh, but it would be legal

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/08/16/trumps-extreme-vetting-is-harsh-but-it-would-be-legal/?utm_term=.b23a8190aac0

I've already told you how much of a fan I am of da Donald. Do try and keep up.

Whether extreme vetting is legal or not we'll never find out what the term meant, see it in action, or hear it mentioned again because Trump's campaign is now being run by a little girl.

[MisterVeritis]

Whether extreme vetting is legal or not we'll never find out what the term meant, see it in action, or hear it mentioned again because Trump's campaign is now being run by a little girl.
:-)

Trump is going to win.

[hanger4]

You haven't noticed all of the preppers on this site?

About all I've noticed in this thread is you running away from your "flip-flop" narrative.

[hanger4]

Whether extreme vetting is legal or not we'll never find out what the term meant, see it in action, or hear it mentioned again because Trump's campaign is now being run by a little girl.

Seems you're flip-floping on the thread topic.

[Bethere]

Seems you're flip-floping on the thread topic.

I am not the subject of this thread. That subject is trump and his shifting views on immigration.

Consider this a warning, sir.

[Bethere]

:-)

Trump is going to win.

Trump will lose, and then he will cry because he will claim that the election was fixed.

[hanger4]

I am not the subject of this thread. That subject is trump and his shifting views on immigration.

Consider this a warning, sir.

Then stay on topic in your own tPF thread

[TrueBlue]

yeah, on O'Reily he was saying that current processes and current laws were the way he was going to go.

Who here remember him talking about a wall, extreme vetting, etc.

?http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/22/trump-reveals-little-deportation-strategy-oreilly-factor/89129066/

“Now, the existing laws are very strong," Trump said. "The existing laws, the first thing we’re gonna do, if and when I win, is we’re gonna get rid of all of the bad ones. We’ve got gang members, we have killers, we have a lot of bad people that have to get out of this country ... they're gonna be out of this country so fast your head will spin."Then, he added: "What people don't know is that (President) Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country" and that former President George W. Bush did the same.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-immigration-stance-flip-flop-227260

Donald Trump and his surrogates on Monday pushed back against the idea that the Republican presidential nominee is softening his hard-line positions on immigration, with Trump himself insisting there has been no “flip-flopping” on his part.

The campaign has found itself on the defensive after BuzzFeed reported over the weekend that Trump had indicated an openness to legalization for undocumented immigrants and after his new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said Trump’s use of a deportation force is “to be determined.”


Ladies and Gentlemen. Your thoughts?
15938

[Bethere]

15938https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZul_mSFczs

it needs to start somewhere
it has to start somehow
what better place than here?
what better time than now?

[FindersKeepers]

Really? I am not the one who is calling for secession, or talking about living off the grid, or screaming about storing enough ammo.

The GOP is scary because they are so totally frightened.


I think living off-grid would be wonderful -- but probably too expensive if I didn't want to lose any amenities, which I don't. But, I don't see anything untoward about it.

Storing a lot of ammo can be counterproductive when it goes bad, and it does, after all.

Succession? A pipe dream at best.

I'm GOP and I'm not frightened. I'm actually a pretty confident and secure person, so I hope that takes me off the "scary" rolls.

Would you consider -- for just a moment -- that the "frightened" aspect you're witnessing in *some* republicans might be the result of what they find scary in society? Isn't that really what we all do? Some find retirement scary and to help ease the inevitable, they keep pushing the SS bandwagon. Some worry they won't make enough money and they push for higher minimum wages. Some find islamic terrorism scary and they advocate for higher vetting, or bans, on Muslim immigration.

Everyone's reacting to their own special brand of fear and as they do, our government passes more laws, implements more regulations, and basically steps on more toes. It can't be helped. So many toes these days.

What if we just let people be people -- until they've done something that is truly harmful? What if we stop trying to control what they think and start focusing on how we can help, rather than hinder, those who disagree with us?

Would that really be so bad?

[FindersKeepers]

15938


Did I not tell you that he would moderate in the General?

[Bethere]

I think living off-grid would be wonderful -- but probably too expensive if I didn't want to lose any amenities, which I don't. But, I don't see anything untoward about it.

Storing a lot of ammo can be counterproductive when it goes bad, and it does, after all.

Succession? A pipe dream at best.

I'm GOP and I'm not frightened. I'm actually a pretty confident and secure person, so I hope that takes me off the "scary" rolls.

Would you consider -- for just a moment -- that the "frightened" aspect you're witnessing in *some* republicans might be the result of what they find scary in society? Isn't that really what we all do? Some find retirement scary and to help ease the inevitable, they keep pushing the SS bandwagon. Some worry they won't make enough money and they push for higher minimum wages. Some find islamic terrorism scary and they advocate for higher vetting, or bans, on Muslim immigration.

Everyone's reacting to their own special brand of fear and as they do, our government passes more laws, implements more regulations, and basically steps on more toes. It can't be helped. So many toes these days.

What if we just let people be people -- until they've done something that is truly harmful? What if we stop trying to control what they think and start focusing on how we can help, rather than hinder, those who disagree with us?

Would that really be so bad?

It wasn't a knock at living off the grid. I do see the attraction.

I tire of hearing how heroic, Christian, and patriotic our frustrated opponents are. They more than just imply that we are not.

To me, it is hard to reconcile their supposed heroism with their obvious fear of the 21st century.

[Tahuyaman]

Trump is now supporting the immigration policy I have been advocating for several years now. Simply enforce existing immigration laws. That is something no one seems willing to do.

He should have been saying that from the beginning.

[Bethere]

Trump is now supporting the immigration policy I have been advocating for several years now. Simply enforce existing immigration laws. That is something no one seems willing to do.

He should have been saying that from the beginning.

But he wasn't. Was he?

[Tahuyaman]

But he wasn't. Was he?

So what?

[MisterVeritis]

Trump will lose, and then he will cry because he will claim that the election was fixed.
We can disagree. The voters will choose.

[MisterVeritis]

Trump is now supporting the immigration policy I have been advocating for several years now. Simply enforce existing immigration laws. That is something no one seems willing to do.

He should have been saying that from the beginning.
Simply is a good word. You are simply simplifying. What is your view on the Southern Wall?

[MisterVeritis]

But he wasn't. Was he?
There is overlap. Build a wall and toss out the illegals based on current, unenforced laws.

[Tahuyaman]

Simply is a good word. You are simply simplifying. What is your view on the Southern Wall?

I heard him say that his policy is to follow the law.

We don't need to build a wall to do that.

[MisterVeritis]

I heard him say that his policy is to follow the law.

We don't need to build a wall to do that.
Right. You simplified him right out of his winning position.

Yes. We need a wall.

[Tahuyaman]

Well, we don't need a wall to follow the law. Abiding by current immigration law would eliminate the problem.

Then we could move on to solve more complex problems.

[Mac-7]

Well, we don't need a wall to follow the law. Abiding by current immigration law would eliminate the problem.

Then we could move on to solve more complex problems.

You need a wall to keep out a flood of illegals who could arrive at the border looking for charity

if a million people show up, parents, children, old people we have no way to keep them out.

[AZ Jim]

ML

My reaction is that the alternstive to trump that liberals and washington insiders push was pro amnesty pro open borders jeb bush and john kasich.

and now the choice is trump or the most corrupt person to run for president since warren g harding.

a woman who is for instant amnesty and open bordersLink please.

[Mac-7]

Link please.

I'm not your Golden Retiever Jim

go to the liberal spin mills for your usual spoon-fed info

if you dont know how to look it up ypurself you'll have take my word that bush and kasich were/are pathway to citizenship quislings who were against building a wall

[Tahuyaman]

You need a wall to keep out a flood of illegals who could arrive at the border looking for charity

if a million people show up, parents, children, old people we have no way to keep them out.

we don't need a wall. Repeating that we do over and over isn't going to change it.

[Mac-7]

we don't need a wall. Repeating that we do over and over isn't going to change it.

How are you going to keep them out?

landmines and machine guns?

[Tahuyaman]

How are you going to keep them out?

landmines and machine guns?


By by allowing our border security people the freedom to do their job and enforce current immigration laws.

[Tahuyaman]

No other actions should take place until we enforce current law.

[MisterVeritis]

we don't need a wall. Repeating that we do over and over isn't going to change it.
So you are a closet open borders guy. Disgusting.

[Tahuyaman]

Let's first enforce the law. We haven't yet tried that one.

[MisterVeritis]

Let's first enforce the law. We haven't yet tried that one.
We can do both. And we should.

[Tahuyaman]

We can do both. And we should.

why just actually enforce the law and then decide if anything else needs to be done? We really don't need to reinvent the wheel.

Don't you believe enforcing the law is a good idea?

[Bethere]

No other actions should take place until we enforce current law.

Translation: Your agent of change now says he doesn't plan to change anything. He cites Obama as an example of
excellence in immigration management.

I'd make it up, but I don't have to in this case.

[Tahuyaman]

Translation: Your agent of change now says he doesn't plan to change anything. He cites Obama as an example of
excellence in immigration management.

I'd make it up, but I don't have to in this case.

why is enforcing the law such a difficult concept to comprehend? Is that asking too much or something?

[Bethere]

why is enforcing the law such a difficult concept to comprehend? Is that asking too much or something?

I have no problem with it at all, but all of the people who have been screaming at his speaking engagements were counting on something else entirely. and yet they say nothing. they're cool with anything he does because it isn't about what he says, it's about how he says it.

They want someone mean, angry, and frustrated--just like they are. Many of them want America to fail so they can rebuild it. many want America to fail just so they can say that "I told you so!"

Most of the more heated arguments on this forum are a farce. That's because the republican in the argument is almost always just doing what rush and friends told him to do. Politics all of the way, for our friends the dittoheads. It is not smart for my liberal friends to kid themselves into believing that they are having an argument with someone who is actually committed to what they are saying.

[Subdermal]

I have no problem with it at all, but all of the people who have been screaming at his speaking engagements were counting on something else entirely. and yet they say nothing. they're cool with anything he does because it isn't about what he says, it's about how he says it.

They want someone mean, angry, and frustrated--just like they are. Many of them want America to fail so they can rebuild it. many want America to fail just so they can say that "I told you so!"

Most of the more heated arguments on this forum are a farce. That's because the republican in the argument is almost always just doing what rush and friends told him to do. Politics all of the way, for our friends the dittoheads. It is not smart for my liberal friends to kid themselves into believing that they are having an argument with someone who is actually committed to what they are saying.

...says the guy who uses a hamster on a wheel when he has no ability to refute the opponent's argument.

Protip: it's not smart to tell your liberal friends that they are having an argument at all.

[Bethere]

...says the guy who uses a hamster on a wheel when he has no ability to refute the opponent's argument.

Protip: it's not smart to tell your liberal friends that they are having an argument at all.

This thread isn't about me.

Please stay on topic.

[Bethere]

No other actions should take place until we enforce current law.

Trumps new position sure looks like that gang of eight position that he was verbally abusing during the primary.

You have to admit, the bald guy will say anything to become president.

[Tahuyaman]

Trumps new position sure looks like that gang of eight position that he was verbally abusing during the primary.

You have to admit, the bald guy will say anything to become president.


What bald guy is running for president?

[Bethere]

What bald guy is running for president?15957

[Tahuyaman]

That's not bald. That's balding.

[Mac-7]

We need a wall and no pathway to citizenship for illegals

But after that some illegals may be allowed to stay

[Chloe]

We need a wall and no pathway to citizenship for illegals

But after that some illegals may be allowed to stay

I'm waiting for Trump to backtrack on the wall like he did on deporting all of the illegal immigrants so that you and other Trump supporters can then say that the wall was just a nice idea but not something that was actually going to get built. You'll then say what Trump really meant was that he is going to build a wall of ideas regarding immigration and not a physical wall.

[Subdermal]

I have no problem with it at all, but all of the people who have been screaming at his speaking engagements were counting on something else entirely. and yet they say nothing. they're cool with anything he does because it isn't about what he says, it's about how he says it.

They want someone mean, angry, and frustrated--just like they are. Many of them want America to fail so they can rebuild it. many want America to fail just so they can say that "I told you so!"

Most of the more heated arguments on this forum are a farce. That's because the republican in the argument is almost always just doing what rush and friends told him to do. Politics all of the way, for our friends the dittoheads. It is not smart for my liberal friends to kid themselves into believing that they are having an argument with someone who is actually committed to what they are saying.


This thread isn't about me.

Please stay on topic.

You made it about you in your post. See above.

When you post something making it about you, it is perfectly legitimate to respond in that manner. You made an assertion about the nature of Trump supporters, and - when I address a response to your manner of doing so - you attempt to insulate criticism by making a false claim.

Trump supporters are sick to death of the corruption in Washington. They view Trump as an outsider who isn't afraid to expose the corruption. They see Hillary as about the perfect symbol of this corruption.

Trump will not change these supporter's perception of him as an outsider who will wreak havoc on this cozy incestuous relationship which Establishment politicians - Globalists - have with one another.

The criticism you offer of 'Republicans' in this forum is a farce; one you demonstrated immediately upon arriving here. There are very few Republicans here. We are mostly not party loyal. We are ideologically driven, and our ideologies vary. Most of your antagonists share a disgust with big Government, its corruption and its syphophants. We despise corrupt people and corrupt practices pursued ostensibly while serving the public.

And we want Hillary relegated to the trash heap. Once again I'll reiterate: your liberal friends do not engage in debate here. They engage in attempts to propagandize, and walk away throwing flak out of their asses when they're engaged.

As do you. Using hamsters.

These comments are on topic, as you've chosen to inject yourself personally into the topic.

[Subdermal]

15957

You troll your own thread with a photoshopped picture? Why?

[Bethere]

You troll your own thread with a photoshopped picture? Why?

Stay on topic.

[Subdermal]

Stay on topic.

I have straightened you out already. I am on topic; you DIRECTED the topic. I am directly responding to your post. You choose to deflect with a picture, and you somehow think posters cannot comment upon your attempt?

[Bethere]

I have straightened you out already. I am on topic; you DIRECTED the topic. I am directly responding to your post. You choose to deflect with a picture, and you somehow think posters cannot comment upon your attempt?

This is your last chance. Stay on topic.

[Mac-7]

By by allowing our border security people the freedom to do their job and enforce current immigration laws.

There are illegal aliens who have been deported many times and they just scurry back into the US within weeks or days.

it takes a physical barrier to stop illegals at the border BEFORE they enter this country.

[Mac-7]

I'm waiting for Trump to backtrack on the wall like he did on deporting all of the illegal immigrants so that you and other Trump supporters can then say that the wall was just a nice idea but not something that was actually going to get built. You'll then say what Trump really meant was that he is going to build a wall of ideas regarding immigration and not a physical wall.

I never expected trump to deport every illegal alien in the US.

To me that was a negotiating position.

the prodlem is that liberals and libertarians do not want to deport anyone.

they want open borders and no immigration quotas.

do you think that is a good idea?

[Tahuyaman]

Trump is backing off his long stated policy ideas and the Trumpsters are fine with that.
They are really no different than the Clintonistas in that regard. Both will always find a way to justify flip-flopping and reversing previously stated positions.

Neither side has the courage to say that they are disappointed in something their candidate does.

[Tahuyaman]

There are illegal aliens who have been deported many times and they just scurry back into the US within weeks or days.

it takes a physical barrier to stop illegals at the border BEFORE they enter this country.

If we allow our border patrol agents the freedom to do their job and enforce current immigration laws, we could prevent their return.

If Trump said standing on one foot and singing the National Anthem would solve the immigration problems, you'd be defending that.

[Mac-7]

Trump is backing off his long stated policy ideas and the Trumpsters are fine with that.
They are really no different than the Clintonistas in that regard. Both will always find a way to justify flip-flopping and reversing previously stated positions.

Neither side has the courage to say that they are disappointed in something their candidate does.

Why is it necessary for trump supporters to tell you how they feel about their candidate at any given point in the election?

you arent voting for trump so why do they/we have to answer to you?

[Mac-7]

If we allow our border patrol agents the freedom to do their job and enforce current immigration laws, we could prevent their return.

If Trump said standing on one foot and singing the National Anthem would solve the immigration problems, you'd be defending that.

Thats the argument open border advocates have been making for thirty years.

but even if there were 100% enforcement of the law - which has never hapoened - we still need the wall to keep out criminals, terrorists and refugees looking for freebees at US taxpayer expense.

only a physical barrior can stop most illegals at the border

[Ethereal]

Trump's immigration policies were unrealistic and unethical from the start. There was never a chance they would actually be implemented. Trump just says whatever he thinks will get him the most votes. JUST LIKE HILLARY CLINTON.

[Ethereal]

Thats the argument open border advocates have been making for thirty years.

but even if there were 100% enforcement of the law - which has never hapoened - we still need the wall to keep out criminals, terrorists and refugees looking for freebees at US taxpayer expense.

only a physical barrior can stop most illegals at the border

Libertarians have been saying to cut off any and all welfare to illegal immigrants, but people like you tell us that's impossible. Instead, you want to pursue an even more impossible agenda of building a gigantic border wall and deporting millions of people.

So instead of trying to pursue a realistic, humane, logical solution to the problem, you go with the most unworkable and extreme option available, ensuring that you will alienate millions of potential voters in the process.

And the most ironic part about it is that you will blame libertarians for your inability to fashion reasonable policies that would earn enough votes to defeat Clinton.

[Mac-7]

Trump's immigration policies were unrealistic and unethical from the start.

There was never a chance they would actually be implemented. Trump just says whatever he thinks will get him the most votes. JUST LIKE HILLARY CLINTON.

Enforcing the law is not unethical

[Mac-7]

Libertarians have been saying to cut off any and all welfare to illegal immigrants, but people like you tell us that's impossible. Instead, you want to pursue an even more impossible agenda of building a gigantic border wall and deporting millions of people.

So instead of trying to pursue a realistic, humane, logical solution to the problem, you go with the most unworkable and extreme option available, ensuring that you will alienate millions of potential voters in the process.

And the most ironic part about it is that you will blame libertarians for your inability to fashion reasonable policies that would earn enough votes to defeat Clinton.

I have never defended the welfare system

you are thinking of the people voting for Hillary not me.

but if you and the other libertarians split the anti welfare vote by voting for johnson it will be impossible to reform welfare with hillary in the white house

millions of people here illegally do deserve to be deported.

not all of them will be but many should be

and if we have a wall they wont be able to sneak back across later

[Ethereal]

I have never defended the welfare system

you are thinking of the people voting for Hillary not me.

but if you and the other libertarians split the anti welfare vote by voting for johnson it will be impossible to reform welfare with hillary in the white house

millions of people here illegally do deserve to be deported.

not all of them will be but many should be

and if we have a wall they wont be able to sneak back across later

The solution to the illegal immigration problem is to cut off the welfare.

A wall and mass deportation simply aren't needed.

[Subdermal]

This is your last chance. Stay on topic.

Then consider this a challenge to you - and to your attempt to co-opt moderation - on this topic. As you can see by the 'likes', two highly regarded posters agree with me. I have remained on topic as you've chosen to diverge from whatever you consider the topic YOURSELF.

You have zero right to claim someone is not remaining on topic when the response directly addresses what you yourself wrote or posted.

You posted a photoshopped pic of Trump. I responded. You called the response 'off-topic'.

No. Sorry. You don't get that latitude merely for creating a tPF thread; your actions are abuse of the purpose. Consider this an opportunity to demonstrate otherwise.

[Tahuyaman]

Enforcing the law is not unethical

you people are arguing against enforcing the law.

[MisterVeritis]

Trump is backing off his long stated policy ideas and the Trumpsters are fine with that.
They are really no different than the Clintonistas in that regard. Both will always find a way to justify flip-flopping and reversing previously stated positions.

Neither side has the courage to say that they are disappointed in something their candidate does.
The Trumpsters, as you call us, are NOT fine with it. Trump harmed himself. That is a shame. I will wait for his policy speech. If he backs away from building a wall and deporting illegal aliens, I will stop supporting him.

[MisterVeritis]

If we allow our border patrol agents the freedom to do their job and enforce current immigration laws, we could prevent their return.

This is an ignorant statement.

[MisterVeritis]

you people are arguing against enforcing the law.
This is an ignorant statement.

[Subdermal]

The solution to the illegal immigration problem is to cut off the welfare.

A wall and mass deportation simply aren't needed.

How is "cutting off welfare" any less unrealistic or unethical than deportation of those who are here illegally?

[PolWatch]

Trump is backing off his long stated policy ideas and the Trumpsters are fine with that.
They are really no different than the Clintonistas in that regard. Both will always find a way to justify flip-flopping and reversing previously stated positions.

Neither side has the courage to say that they are disappointed in something their candidate does.

That ^^^ is a perfect explanation of partisanship! 'Reality doesn't matter as long as MY team wins!'

[Tahuyaman]

The Trumpsters, as you call us, are NOT fine with it. Trump harmed himself. That is a shame. I will wait for his policy speech. If he backs away from building a wall and deporting illegal aliens, I will stop supporting him.


So far, you are the only person who currently supports him who has said anything like that.

However, when it comes to deporting illegals, all he has to do is say that he wants to enforce the law. That should cover all the bases.

[Tahuyaman]

This is an ignorant statement.

I Advocate enforcing the laws and the Trumpsters argue against that position.

[Mac-7]

The solution to the illegal immigration problem is to cut off the welfare.

A wall and mass deportation simply aren't needed.

How are you going to cut off welfare with Hillary in the White House?

Besides if a million refuges surge across the undefended open border they cannot be sent back immediately so you will be forced to feed them and otherwise take care of them

But you know this and are just pretending not to get it

[Mac-7]

How is "cutting off welfare" any less unrealistic or unethical than deportation of those who are here illegally?

The open border libs are just saying that to but time and confuse moderate voters with a 5 minute attention span

Libs know president Clinton - who they helped elect - will never do it

[MisterVeritis]

The Trumpsters, as you call us, are NOT fine with it. Trump harmed himself. That is a shame. I will wait for his policy speech. If he backs away from building a wall and deporting illegal aliens, I will stop supporting him.

So far, you are the only person who currently supports him who has said anything like that.

However, when it comes to deporting illegals, all he has to do is say that he wants to enforce the law. That should cover all the bases.
your inability to pay attention is not my problem.

Trump continues to say he will get the wall built and will enforce the existing laws. I will wait for his speech.

His comments have demoralized me. I represent his base. If he loses me, he loses and the nation ends.

[MisterVeritis]

I Advocate enforcing the laws and the Trumpsters argue against that position.
This is an ignorant statement.

Why lie?

[Ethereal]

How is "cutting off welfare" any less unrealistic or unethical than deportation of those who are here illegally?

Because there are logical and ethical arguments against deporting millions of people.

There are no logical or ethical arguments against denying foreign nationals access to the US's taxpayer-funded welfare system.

[Ethereal]

How are you going to cut off welfare with Hillary in the White House?

Besides if a million refuges surge across the undefended open border they cannot be sent back immediately so you will be forced to feed them and otherwise take care of them

But you know this and are just pretending not to get it

It's far more realistic politically speaking to cut off welfare to illegal immigrants than it is to build a giant wall and deport millions of people.

But you know this and are just pretending not to get it.

[MisterVeritis]

There are no logical or ethical arguments against denying foreign nationals access to the US's taxpayer-funded welfare system.
There are no logical or ethical arguments against denying foreign nationals access to the US.

Boot them.

[Ethereal]

There are no logical or ethical arguments against denying foreign nationals access to the US.

Boot them.

Sure there are.

Logically speaking, rounding up and deporting millions of people is practically impossible, not to mention expensive.

Ethically speaking, there are problems associated with breaking up families and erroneously harassing and arresting actual US citizens.

It is never, ever going to happen, nor should it.

And that is why it is far more reasonable to concentrate on cutting off welfare to illegal immigrants, because it's far easier and far more ethical.

[Mac-7]

So far, you are the only person who currently supports him who has said anything like that.

However, when it comes to deporting illegals, all he has to do is say that he wants to enforce the law. That should cover all the bases.

I keep wondering why do we have to report to libertarians like T about how we score trump at any given moment?

[Mac-7]

Because there are logical and ethical arguments against deporting millions of people.

There are no logical or ethical arguments against denying foreign nationals access to the US's taxpayer-funded welfare system.

There is no moral or ethical reason for pandering to foreigners who are breaking our immigration laws

None at all

[Mac-7]

It's far more realistic politically speaking to cut off welfare to illegal immigrants than it is to build a giant wall and deport millions of people.

But you know this and are just pretending not to get it.

Do you really think president Hillary is going to cut off welfare to illegal aliens?

Really?

If you vote for Gary Johnson and thereby help elect Hillary we will get more illegal aliens sucking up more welfare dollars

[Mac-7]

Sure there are.

Logically speaking, rounding up and deporting millions of people is practically impossible, not to mention expensive.

Ethically speaking, there are problems associated with breaking up families and erroneously harassing and arresting actual US citizens.

It is never, ever going to happen, nor should it.

And that is why it is far more reasonable to concentrate on cutting off welfare to illegal immigrants, because it's far easier and far more ethical.

So you are too softhearted to break up families by deporting illegal aliens

but at the same time you are willing to cut off welfare to illegal alien families and watch babies starve to death?

That makes no sense at all

[Bethere]

So you are too softhearted to break up families by deporting illegal aliens

but at the same time you are willing to cut off welfare to illegal alien families and watch babies starve to death?

That makes no sense at all

Watching you guys fight among yourselves is absolutely gratifying!

1. Keep up the good work;

2. Good times!

[Mac-7]

Watching you guys fight among yourselves is absolutely gratifying!



I agree that the unHillary voters are divided and fighting among ourselves.

And it pains me as much as it entertains you.

[Tahuyaman]

The Trumpsters, as you call us, are NOT fine with it....

His comments have demoralized me.

you're with him no matter what.

[Mac-7]

you're with him no matter what.

Do you expect us to help you elect hillary instead?

[Tahuyaman]

The nomination of Trump assured us of another Clinton administration.

[MisterVeritis]

Sure there are.

Logically speaking, rounding up and deporting millions of people is practically impossible, not to mention expensive.
No. It is easily done. Begin with the low hanging fruit. Work your way on up the tree until you need a ladder.


Ethically speaking, there are problems associated with breaking up families and erroneously harassing and arresting actual US citizens.
Send the families out. If the father and mother, are illegals than the kids should be too. Send them out with their parents. If they want to come back as adults they can move to the head of the line.


It is never, ever going to happen, nor should it.

And that is why it is far more reasonable to concentrate on cutting off welfare to illegal immigrants, because it's far easier and far more ethical.
Your arguments are poor.

[MisterVeritis]

you're with him no matter what.
Maybe. If the nation must perish, as it must with open borders, I prefer history record the evilness of the Democratic party.

[Tahuyaman]

Maybe. If the nation must perish, as it must with open borders, I prefer history record the evilness of the Democratic party.

what does that have to do with Trump?

[Bethere]

No. It is easily done. Begin with the low hanging fruit. Work your way on up the tree until you need a ladder.


Send the families out. If the father and mother, are illegals than the kids should be too. Send them out with their parents. If they want to come back as adults they can move to the head of the line.


Your arguments are poor.

If those children are born here, then according to the 14th amendment , they are birth right American citizens.

I know you don't like that.

Why do you hate the US Constitution?

[Mac-7]

The nomination of Trump assured us of another Clinton administration.

Not necessarily

you give up too easily

But I voted for cruz in the primary

who did you vote for?

[Mac-7]

If those children are born here, then according to the 14th amendment , they are birth right American citizens.

I know you don't like that.

Why do you hate the US Constitution?

That is not true

its only US legal code passed by congress that says they are citizens.

we could end that by amending the law

[Bethere]

The
That is not trueits only US legal code passed by congress that says they are citizens.we could end that by amending the law

1.
.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

2.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/08/31/donald-trump-meet-wong-kim-ark-the-chinese-american-cook-who-is-the-father-of-birthright-citizenship/

For Justice Horace Gray (http://www.oyez.org/justices/horace_gray)it was an open and shut case. The majority opinion was issued on March 28, 1898.History and law, he wrote, “irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens ….The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States.”

3.
The birthright citizenship act of 2015 is a joke. It will work its way to the Supreme Court soon to get swatted away just like so many gop frivolous suits do.

File it with the "sun comes up in the morning act of 2016."

[Mac-7]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.


"Perantently domiciled" means a legal resident.

which illegal aliens are not

[Mac-7]

But if hillary wins the election thanks to the help of libertarians voting for johnson the first thing she will do is appoint a judge who will agree with you on the issue.

which I think makes the libertarians as happy as it makes you

[Bethere]

"Perantently domiciled" means a legal resident.

which illegal aliens are not

Permanently domiciled only meant 'legally' in the dissent.

The holding says 'resident alien.' It's backed up by 120 years of accumulated jurisprudence.

You guys love to fool yourselves.

[Mac-7]

Permanently domiciled only meant 'legally' in the dissent.

.

An illegal alien is not here legally

[Bethere]

But if hillary wins the election thanks to the help of libsrtarians voting for johnson the first thing she will do is appoint a judge who will agree with you on the issue.

which I think makes the libertarians as happy as it makes you

Absolutely.

[Bethere]

An illegal alien is not here legally

The holding doesn't require them to be.

[Mac-7]

The holding doesn't require them to be.

The holding dealt with an anchor bady of legal residents

[Bethere]

The holding dealt with an anchor bady of legal residents

But the ruling was more expensive than that. More importantly it has withstood 120 years of challenges.

You should read the wapo story. It's a good read. Gives you a feel for what life was like before the turn of the century.

[Mac-7]

But the ruling was more expensive than that.

More importantly it has withstood 120 years of challenges.

You should read the wapo story. It's a good read. Gives you a feel for what life was like before the turn of the century.

what challenge?

there has not been a challenge to the current liberal spin on the subject

[Bethere]

what challenge?

there has not been a challenge to the current liberal spin on the subject

The thing that gets people in trouble are the prepositional phrases, "in the allegiance, " and, "under the protection of the country."

Those phrases modify "territory," not "birth."

It's not your fault but it really is an exercise in self deception.

[Mac-7]

The thing that gets people in trouble are the prepositional phrases, "in the allegiance, " and, "under the protection of the country."

Those phrases modify "territory," not "birth."

It's not your fault but it really is an exercise in self deception.

The problem is liberals and libertarians who want to flood this country with foreigners and are using the anchor baby loophole in the law to do it

[Bethere]

The problem is liberals and libertarians who want to flood this country with foreigners and are using the anchor baby loophole in the law to do it

Ah, but that is a debate for another day.

Maybe tomorrow night.

As it is, it was fun to debate without rancor.

I like tPF threads.

Good times.

[Tahuyaman]

Not necessarily

you give up too easily

But I voted for cruz in the primary

who did you vote for?

I received some kind of screwed up primary ballot in the mail. It had three choices. I threw it in the trash.

[Tahuyaman]

@Mac7 thinks that libertarians are liberals.

Thats funny.

[Mac-7]

I received some kind of screwed up primary ballot in the mail. It had three choices. I threw it in the trash.

Uh-huh

In another words you contributed nothing to the process but chose to turn your nose up at the result

That's a typical lib who wants to always complain while avoiding all responsibility

Other than being guilty of neglect

[Tahuyaman]

Uh-huh

In another words you contributed nothing to the process but chose to turn your nose up at the result

That's a typical lib who wants to always complain while avoiding all responsibility

Other than being guilty of neglect


I contributed nothing because nothing was offered. Three candidates. None of which were acceptable.

I'll contribute in November by voting for Gary Johnson.

[Tahuyaman]

Mac gives conservatives a bad name.

[Mac-7]

I contributed nothing because nothing was offered. Three candidates. None of which were acceptable.

I'll contribute in November by voting for Gary Johnson.

Hillary thanks you for you help

[Mac-7]

Mac gives conservatives a bad name.

Because many people cannot stand to hear the truth

[Tahuyaman]

People who support the candidacy of a complete buffoon actually will blame others when that buffoon loses.

[Mac-7]

People who support the candidacy of a complete buffoon actually will blame others when that buffoon loses.

Trump is not a buffoon

That is the liberal negative spin for people like you who are comfortable with Hillary but are too dishonest to say so

[Tahuyaman]

Trump is not a buffoon

That is the liberal negative spin for people like you who are comfortable with Hillary but are too dishonest to say so


Trump isn't a buffoon? Holy shit!

[Mac-7]

Trump isn't a buffoon? Holy $#@!!

He may be to you and Hillary and the partisan democrat news media

Hillary is scripted and focused group trained

But also a damn fool and the most corrupt candidate for president since Warren Harding

You want open borders and a continuation of the shoeless Mexican invasion which trump threatens to end

[MisterVeritis]

what does that have to do with Trump?
Must every simple thing be explained to you?

Lyin', Hidin', Washington Insider Hillary will keep the borders open for illegals, Muslims, and additional millions of black and brown illiterate people from third world nations. They will be placed in voting districts that give Republicans victories. They will be indoctrinated as Democrats with free stuff. As soon as possible they will vote.

Kennedy's bill turned law has brought 57 million of the dumbest, poorest, sickest black and brown people in the world into the US. Already, Republicans begin with a huge disadvantage in national elections. Of those 57 million who were brought here about 47 million remain (people die and people leave). With just another 3-5 million more of these imported Democrats we will have a one-party, corrupt political system that will rival the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

It will be the end of the USA as a free nation.

Trump, used to oppose this. The rumors are that Chris Christy convinced Trump to waffle, to attempt to pander for votes. If true then we might as well see the end of the nation under Lyin' Hidin' Washington Insider Hillary. We will serve as a warning to some future free nation, if there should ever again be one.

[Tahuyaman]

The only people who believe Trump is not a buffoon are the extreme partisan Republicans. Coincidently the same mind-set only on the opposite side believes Mrs. Clinton is honest and trustworthy.

[MisterVeritis]

If those children are born here, then according to the 14th amendment , they are birth right American citizens.

I know you don't like that.

Why do you hate the US Constitution?
Your understanding of the Constitution is fatally flawed. We already know that.

[Tahuyaman]

Must every simple thing be explained to you?

Lyin', Hidin', Washington Insider Hillary will keep the borders open for illegals, Muslims, and additional millions of black and brown illiterate people from third world nations. They will be placed in voting districts than give Republicans victories. They will be indoctrinated as Democrats with free stuff. As soon as possible they will vote.

Kennedy's bill turned law has brought 57 million of the dumbest, poorest, sickest black and brown people in the world into the US. Already, Republicans begin with a huge disadvantage in national elections. Of those 57 million who were brought here about 47 million remain (people die and people leave). With just another 3-5 million more of these imported Democrats we will have a one-party, corrupt political system that will rival the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

It will be the end of the USA as a free nation.

Trump would not be able to solve any of the problems we are faced with today.

[MisterVeritis]

The

1.
.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

2.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/08/31/donald-trump-meet-wong-kim-ark-the-chinese-american-cook-who-is-the-father-of-birthright-citizenship/

For Justice Horace Gray (http://www.oyez.org/justices/horace_gray)it was an open and shut case. The majority opinion was issued on March 28, 1898.History and law, he wrote, “irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens ….The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States.”

3.
The birthright citizenship act of 2015 is a joke. It will work its way to the Supreme Court soon to get swatted away just like so many gop frivolous suits do.

File it with the "sun comes up in the morning act of 2016."

Once again you prove how shallow your understanding is.

[MisterVeritis]

Permanently domiciled only meant 'legally' in the dissent.

The holding says 'resident alien.' It's backed up by 120 years of accumulated jurisprudence.

You guys love to fool yourselves.
The fool here is you.

[MisterVeritis]

The problem is liberals and libertarians who want to flood this country with foreigners and are using the anchor baby loophole in the law to do it
It can be stopped. But it will require a leader.

[Bethere]

Your understanding of the Constitution is fatally flawed. We already know that.

Birthright citizenship is the law of the land.

Deal with it.

[MisterVeritis]

The only people who believe Trump is not a buffoon are the extreme partisan Republicans. Coincidently the same mind-set only on the opposite side believes Mrs. Clinton is honest and trustworthy.
I do not object to your eagerness to see the nation ended under Hillary. You are only a bit worse than the garden-variety, evil Democrat who openly supports Lyin' Hidin' Washington Insider Hillary.

[MisterVeritis]

Birthright citizenship is the law of the land.

Deal with it.
It is not the law. The damage can be repaired. Under the right president it will be.

[Mac-7]

The only people who believe Trump is not a buffoon are the extreme partisan Republicans. Coincidently the same mind-set only on the opposite side believes Mrs. Clinton is honest and trustworthy.

Obviously she is honest enough for you to help make her the next president

[MisterVeritis]

Trump would not be able to solve any of the problems we are faced with today.
I get it. You are a secret Hillary supporter. The nation will end under Clinton. Do you believe you will escape your fate because you concealed your support for Crooked, Corrupt Hillary?

[Bethere]

I get it. You are a secret Hillary supporter. The nation will end under Clinton. Do you believe you will escape your fate because you concealed your support for Crooked, Corrupt Hillary?

Please steer these rants back to on topic.

Remember that this is a tPF thread.

[Tahuyaman]

I get it. You are a secret Hillary supporter. The nation will end under Clinton. Do you believe you will escape your fate because you concealed your support for Crooked, Corrupt Hillary?That's it. You got me!

I believe we are strong enough to survive either Trump or Hillary. We've survived the current incompetent egomaniac.

[Mac-7]

It can be stopped. But it will require a leader.

Trump is the only one who could be that leader

[Mac-7]

That's it. You got me!

I believe we are strong enough to survive either Trump or Hillary. We've survived the current incompetent egomaniac.

Have we survived or gotten weaker?

The US has declined under Obama

That does not bother you very much down there in Mexico but many people here in America don't like it at all

[Tahuyaman]

I'm not in Mexico during the summer, but it wouldn't make any difference if I was.

In the future, most people will look back on this election and be embarrassed that they supported either Clinton or Trump. I won't be one of the embarrassed.

[MisterVeritis]

I'm not in Mexico during the summer, but it wouldn't make any difference if I was.

In the future, most people will look back on this election and be embarrassed that they supported either Clinton or Trump. I won't be one of the embarrassed.
I am sure that will give you great comfort while the nation ends.

[Ethereal]

I am sure that will give you great comfort while the nation ends.

The nation ended a long time ago. Don't kid yourself.

[MisterVeritis]

The nation ended a long time ago. Don't kid yourself.
Then I suppose everything is hunky-dory. Trump offers a brief respite form the headlong rush to our ruin. Don't kid yourself.

[Mac-7]

I'm not in Mexico during the summer, but it wouldn't make any difference if I was.

In the future, most people will look back on this election and be embarrassed that they supported either Clinton or Trump. I won't be one of the embarrassed.

No one will be embarrassed by the next president

Hillary voters do not care what she is

And libertarians will pretend they had nothing to do with it when they are just as guilty as the most loyal Hillary supporter

[MisterVeritis]

I'm not in Mexico during the summer, but it wouldn't make any difference if I was.

In the future, most people will look back on this election and be embarrassed that they supported either Clinton or Trump. I won't be one of the embarrassed.
Pontius Pilate washed his hands, too. How did that work out for him? How do you believe it will work out for you?

[Ethereal]

Then I suppose everything is hunky-dory. Trump offers a brief respite form the headlong rush to our ruin. Don't kid yourself.

We're already ruined. We've been ruined for a long time. And Trump isn't going to do anything to reverse the process.

[MisterVeritis]

We're already ruined. We've been ruined for a long time. And Trump isn't going to do anything to reverse the process.
I am sure your certainty comforts you.

[Ethereal]

I am sure your certainty comforts you.

Not really.

The American revolution was the greatest event in human history, in my humble opinion.

And it was squandered by criminals, cowards, and ingrates.

[MisterVeritis]

Not really.

The American revolution was the greatest event in human history, in my humble opinion.

And it was squandered by criminals, cowards, and ingrates.
And you are following in the latter's footsteps.

It is time to reconsider your role.

[Ethereal]

And you are following in the latter's footsteps.

It is time to reconsider your role.

I've tolerated your repeated, unwarranted insults because you reached out to me through private message and we had a good discussion.

But that is the last straw.

Your womanish attachment to Donald Trump is your prerogative, but don't question my patriotism just because I refuse to think and act like you.

[Mac-7]

I've tolerated your repeated, unwarranted insults because you reached out to me through private message and we had a good discussion.

But that is the last straw.

Your womanish attachment to Donald Trump is your prerogative, but don't question my patriotism just because I refuse to think and act like you.

I question your judgement and common sense for thinking Hillary is no worse or exactly the same as trump

[Ethereal]

I question your judgement and common sense for thinking Hillary is no worse or exactly the same as trump

There is no need to lie.

[Mac-7]

There is no need to lie.

If you think Hillary is worse then it's your duty to vote for trump

[Chloe]

If you think Hillary is worse then it's your duty to vote for trump

no it's not

[Ethereal]

If you think Hillary is worse then it's your duty to vote for trump

No it isn't.

[MisterVeritis]

I've tolerated your repeated, unwarranted insults because you reached out to me through private message and we had a good discussion.
I checked my private messages. I see I offered you some engineering career advice based on my engineering management experiences.


But that is the last straw.

Your womanish attachment to Donald Trump is your prerogative, but don't question my patriotism just because I refuse to think and act like you.
You raised the criminals, cowards, and ingrates. You are doing what they did. Aren't you?

Based on your comments here you would have stood by in the first revolution. I have no doubt you will stand by during the second. Not only do you not support Trump, you actively denigrate the one guy who can provide some breathing room.

You will watch the nation fall. And you believe I am claiming you are unpatriotic? I simply point out your position.

[Tahuyaman]

Pontius Pilate washed his hands, too. How did that work out for him? How do you believe it will work out for you?

You're actually trying to compare Donald Trump to Jesus Christ.


Infreakingcredible

[Ethereal]

I checked my private messages. I see I offered you some engineering career advice based on my engineering management experiences.

Right, like I said. You PM'ed me, we had a good, respectful discussion, and because of that, I've tolerated your insolent posting style.


You raised the criminals, cowards, and ingrates. You are doing what they did. Aren't you?

Based on your comments here you would have stood by in the first revolution. I have no doubt you will stand by during the second. Not only do you not support Trump, you actively denigrate the one guy who can provide some breathing room.

You will watch the nation fall. And you believe I am claiming you are unpatriotic? I simply point out your position.

If you want to be a member of Trump's cult, then go right ahead. But that doesn't make you a patriot.

[Tahuyaman]

There's no reasonable explanation for anyone to support either Ttump or Clinton. It's irrational to support either.

[MisterVeritis]

You're actually trying to compare Donald Trump to Jesus Christ.

Infreakingcredible
I am comparing you to Pilate. You are not the brightest person in your house, are you?

[MisterVeritis]

If you want to be a member of Trump's cult, then go right ahead. But that doesn't make you a patriot.
I have made no claims of patriotism. A Trump presidency buys more time for an Article V Convention of States.

I suppose it comes down to Trump's "cult" or lyin' Hidin' Washington Insider Hillary's "cult". If you do not choose Trump you are selecting Hillary.

[Ethereal]

I have made no claims of patriotism. A Trump presidency buys more time for an Article V Convention of States.

I suppose it comes down to Trump's "cult" or lyin' Hidin' Washington Insider Hillary's "cult". If you do not choose Trump you are selecting Hillary.

I reject your false dichotomy.

I choose to employ the rightful remedy of nullification and federalism in the face of tyranny.

[MisterVeritis]

I reject your false dichotomy.
You can reject whatever you want. You cannot escape the consequences.


I choose to employ the rightful remedy of nullification and federalism in the face of tyranny.
:-)

[Ethereal]

You can reject whatever you want. You cannot escape the consequences.


:-)

It's a false dichotomy.

There is a third choice, one that does not rely on federal elections and policies.

It's the rightful remedy espoused by Thomas Jefferson and articulated in the Kentucky Resolutions:


Resolved that the several states composing the US. of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the US. and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each state to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; & that whensoever the General government assumes undelegated powers, it’s acts are unauthoritative, void, & of no[1] force: that to this compact each state acceded as a state, and is an integral party, it’s co-states forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made it’s discretion, & not the constitution, the measure of it’s powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions, as of the mode & measure of redress.

So if Clinton gets elected and tries to come after the second amendment, then I will simply refuse to listen because she has no constitutional authority to compel my obedience.

[Mac-7]

no it's not

You don't count since in your case it's a coin flip between Hillary and a declared socialist

But for those of us who are not liberals Hillary should be the worst possible choice

[MisterVeritis]

It's a false dichotomy.
There is a third choice, one that does not rely on federal elections and policies.
It's the rightful remedy espoused by Thomas Jefferson and articulated in the Kentucky Resolutions:

So if Clinton gets elected and tries to come after the second amendment, then I will simply refuse to listen because she has no constitutional authority to compel my obedience.
You will not escape the consequences.

[Ethereal]

You will not escape the consequences.

I'm prepared to defend my liberty, whatever the consequences.

[MisterVeritis]

I'm prepared to defend my liberty, whatever the consequences.
I do not believe that. Your first line of defense is Trump. You eagerly pass him by.

You are committing suicide.

[Mac-7]

[QUOTE=Ethereal;


So if Clinton gets elected and tries to come after the second amendment, then I will simply refuse to listen because she has no constitutional authority to compel my obedience.[/QUOTE]

You may not live long after Hillary takes office

[Ethereal]

I do not believe that. Your first line of defense is Trump. You eagerly pass him by.

You are committing suicide.

What you believe is of no concern to me.

[Ethereal]

You may not live long after Hillary takes office

She'll have to kill a lot of Americans then.

[MisterVeritis]

Your first line of defense is Trump. You eagerly pass him by.
You are committing suicide.

What you believe is of no concern to me.
Cool. You are free to act. You are not free of the consequences. Yours is the last word.

[Bethere]

I reject your false dichotomy.

I choose to employ the rightful remedy of nullification and federalism in the face of tyranny.

We had a war about nullification.

You lost.

600,000 died.

[Bethere]

You're actually trying to compare Donald Trump to Jesus Christ. InfreakingcredibleThis is the bestest thread ever!15969

[Subdermal]

There's no reasonable explanation for anyone to support either Ttump or Clinton. It's irrational to support either.

It's perfectly rational; you just don't agree.

I support Trump because only he can beat Hillary. Trump's SCOTUS will look markedly different than Hillary's.

Upon that basis alone, supporting Trump is logical, rational and reasonable.

[Subdermal]

I contributed nothing because nothing was offered. Three candidates. None of which were acceptable.

I'll contribute in November by voting for Gary Johnson.

You're contributing to Hillary, and attempting to smear Mac won't change that.

Action has consequences; inaction has consequences.

[Subdermal]

Mac gives conservatives a bad name.

Conservatives who do not do everything in their power to deny Hillary the Presidency give conservatives a bad name. If you're lobbing pejoratives, that one appears to fit you, doesn't it?

Mac-7 did rather a nice job refuting the OP's transparent argument on anchor babies and immigration.

[Subdermal]

People who support the candidacy of a complete buffoon actually will blame others when that buffoon loses.

:facepalm:

That's logical to you?

[Subdermal]

The only people who believe Trump is not a buffoon are the extreme partisan Republicans. Coincidently the same mind-set only on the opposite side believes Mrs. Clinton is honest and trustworthy.

It is my belief that you are attempting to make binary - to marginalize Trump support - something which is not.

In such a way, you are no different than Hillary supporters, and are actually aiding and abetting them.

[Subdermal]

Trump would not be able to solve any of the problems we are faced with today.

And Gary Johnson can?

How?

[Bethere]

You're contributing to Hillary, and attempting to smear Mac won't change that.

Action has consequences; inaction has consequences.

https://media.giphy.com/media/b7o3l61pnUhgc/giphy.gif

[Subdermal]

We're already ruined. We've been ruined for a long time. And Trump isn't going to do anything to reverse the process.

You can say that about anyone, employing such a defeatist standard.

Electing Trump sends a very powerful message to the Establishment, and grants Trump a mandate to be brash and effective. Trump has been effective his entire life.

Fact is this: none of the other 3 candidates have demonstrated anything near the level of effectiveness that Trump has demonstrated in his life.

And it isn't even close.

[Subdermal]

I've tolerated your repeated, unwarranted insults because you reached out to me through private message and we had a good discussion.

But that is the last straw.

Your womanish attachment to Donald Trump is your prerogative, but don't question my patriotism just because I refuse to think and act like you.

You're wrong here, Eth. It's why you're getting the wrong type of posters 'liking' your comment.

[Subdermal]

You're actually trying to compare Donald Trump to Jesus Christ.


Infreakingcredible

You think MV just compared Trump to Christ?

:facepalm:

Look at who 'liked' your post. If that doesn't scream to you evidence of your astray thinking, I doubt I could have an effect.

[Bethere]

You're wrong here, Eth. It's why you're getting the wrong type of posters 'liking' your comment.

The "wrong type of poster" reminds you to stay on topic or get out.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.

http://midwestmagic.net/images/JO-0438.jpg

[Subdermal]

It's a false dichotomy.

There is a third choice, one that does not rely on federal elections and policies.

It's the rightful remedy espoused by Thomas Jefferson and articulated in the Kentucky Resolutions:



So if Clinton gets elected and tries to come after the second amendment, then I will simply refuse to listen because she has no constitutional authority to compel my obedience.


Good grief, Eth. I'd love it to come to that, but the problem is simply this: the same level of monogamous support for such an act to succeed would also have never allowed Hillary access to the WH in the first place!

Thus: how could such an effort possibly ever succeed if it failed to prevent the electing the entity which prompts its need?

So the very circumstance that would compel you to seek such a cure is the exact same one which you created by stubbornly making the enemy the perfect of the good.

Your position is not logical.

[Subdermal]

https://media.giphy.com/media/b7o3l61pnUhgc/giphy.gif

You want to know why you were not allowed to ban me from this thread, Bethere?

It's because you're so transparently hypocritical in your own tPF thread that you've completely marginalized your credibility on this forum.

[Subdermal]

The "wrong type of poster" reminds you to stay on topic or get out.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.

http://midwestmagic.net/images/JO-0438.jpg

Actually, Bethere, you've been reprimanded on this already. I am on topic. I am discussing the content of the poster to whom I am responding - and there is nothing whatsoever wrong with pointing out who it is who commented upon it as well.

[Bethere]

You want to know why you were not allowed to ban me from this thread, Bethere?

It's because you're so transparently hypocritical in your own tPF thread that you've completely marginalized your credibility on this forum.

No, one has tried to ban you or anyone else from this thread. Go back and check. Neither have I been reprimanded

Stay on topic, or leave.

[Subdermal]

No, one has tried to ban you or anyone else from this thread. Go back and check. Neither have I been reprimanded

Stay on topic, or leave.

15971

[Bethere]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/69038-An-open-discussion-of-the-abuse-of-tPF
https://media.giphy.com/media/9you7hX7ZEUxO/giphy.gif

[Tahuyaman]

I am comparing you to Pilate. You are not the brightest person in your house, are you?

You should be careful about the insults you attempt to hurl.

[Bethere]

You should be careful about the insults you attempt to hurl.

Indeed.

[Tahuyaman]

It's perfectly rational; you just don't agree.

I support Trump because only he can beat Hillary. Trump's SCOTUS will look markedly different than Hillary's.

Upon that basis alone, supporting Trump is logical, rational and reasonable.


But he can't beat Hillary.

[Tahuyaman]

You're contributing to Hillary, and attempting to smear Mac won't change that.

Action has consequences; inaction has consequences.

Mac smears himself.

[Tahuyaman]

Conservatives who do not do everything in their power to deny Hillary the Presidency give conservatives a bad name. If you're lobbing pejoratives, that one appears to fit you, doesn't it?

Mac-7 did rather a nice job refuting the OP's transparent argument on anchor babies and immigration.

conservatives don't compromise their principles and support one liberal over another liberal.

[Tahuyaman]

And Gary Johnson can?

How?Gary Johnson has no chance, but listen to him. His ideas make sense.

[Tahuyaman]

You think MV just compared Trump to Christ?
someone tried to compare Trump to the crucifixion of Christ.

[Ethereal]

We had a war about nullification.

You lost.

600,000 died.

That war was about secession, not nullification.

But even if it were about nullification, it wouldn't matter, because might does not make right.

[Ethereal]

You can say that about anyone, employing such a defeatist standard.

Electing Trump sends a very powerful message to the Establishment, and grants Trump a mandate to be brash and effective. Trump has been effective his entire life.

Fact is this: none of the other 3 candidates have demonstrated anything near the level of effectiveness that Trump has demonstrated in his life.

And it isn't even close.

I would say that about anyone, even Ron Paul.

Though it would be a nice symbolic victory to see a libertarian become president, it wouldn't remedy the situation.

The problem runs much deeper than that, and is ingrained in the collective psyche of the population.

America needs a revolution of the mind before anything truly meaningful can take place in the political arena.

But if you think supporting Trump will help, then go ahead and support Trump. I'm not going to hold it against it you. I simply ask that you return the favor by respecting my decision not to vote for Trump.

[Ethereal]

You're wrong here, Eth. It's why you're getting the wrong type of posters 'liking' your comment.

What am I wrong about? Because as far as I can tell, the only thing I did was disagree with Mister V about the necessity of supporting Trump and he accused me of being a coward and a traitor.