@ad1x2: and bring up is pointless. They can't force open borders to happen.
@mattbbpl: I’m aware that he doesn’t represent the entire Democratic Party, but when you are that high up you are probably going to make people think that you are speaking for the Democratic Party as a whole. If Ronna McDaniel puts out a major position a lot of people may think that is the position of the GOP as a whole even if the majority says otherwise.
You don’t have to repeat to me that the Democratic Party as a whole does not want open borders. But if posters are going to claim that not a single member of the party wants open borders they may want to fact check first to make sure powerful members of their party didn’t say otherwise.
As for Steve King, he may be a racist, but his comments cost him his committee assignments in the House and earned him strong rebukes from many Republicans to include demands to resign. If he refuses to do so, don’t be surprised if he is booted in the 2020 primaries assuming he isn’t outright expelled.
In terms of my own voting record, I am open minded and will vote for whomever is closest to what I want to be put into effect. That is why I have voted for both Democrats and Republicans. I was against Mitt Romney in the 2012 election because I was more in line with what President Obama was doing at the time. Despite that, I have been called alt-right and other insults due to me being a little to the right of most of the posters here.
I think we should put the wall money into putting making Mexico better, so that people don't have to flee the country.
Like annex a huge section of Mexico, and implant an American-ran city, but hire all the Mexicans who want our citizenship, have them work there for like 1 year and give them a nice place to stay while they earn the full citizenship, with programs to transfer them into the country.
I know that sounds insane, but seriously, making a wall doesn't make us better, might as well put the money into facilities in Mexico, so that the process of coming in isn't so archaic that people die in custody.
@CreasianDevaili: again. Ask trump . he is the cause of it.
But we're all a player in the ring, regardless. We both agree trump is a big baby and is trying to get his way. Seemingly a larger amount of voters currently agree with that as well, so 2020 is a shoe in to get Trump out of office? So according to you he's being a dick with an issue that will be instantly reversed within two years, which means other than where the fence is already up not much will be changed.
So give him the wall if it's not a real threat. If it is a threat, then what was the point of saying it isn't one?
It's a threat to the eco system and it increases spending at a time when he gifted his buddies less tax.....ie decreased revenue.
None of which we are in disagreement of. My point is that this type of thread is counterproductive. In many ways it feels like the same idiocy of everyone saying how Trump didn't have a chance, or even Brexit. I fail to see the worth in trying to make something that is a threat out to not be one.
According to the OP, the wall wouldn't be able to do anything in the time left and be easily rectified later, along with further supporting replies to that affect. Wouldn't that kind of mentality actually encourage people on the fence to say just give him the damn wall instead because it's not worth it over something trivial?
Isn't this the same kind of crap that Acosta got wrapped up in just recently?
@CreasianDevaili: or it just points out how dumb the wall is and pointless the wall is.
Which can be used for multiple sides of the argument, which isn't exactly healthy for progress. I think some of you are getting a bit too comfortable again, so you wanna play a little. But at least to me I think the situation is rather serious and nearly everyone has given a toddler what they wanted so they would just be quiet at some point or another.
I just don't think you should be playing gotcha, just yet.
@CreasianDevaili: again. Ask trump . he is the cause of it.
But we're all a player in the ring, regardless. We both agree trump is a big baby and is trying to get his way. Seemingly a larger amount of voters currently agree with that as well, so 2020 is a shoe in to get Trump out of office? So according to you he's being a dick with an issue that will be instantly reversed within two years, which means other than where the fence is already up not much will be changed.
So give him the wall if it's not a real threat. If it is a threat, then what was the point of saying it isn't one?
It's a threat to the eco system and it increases spending at a time when he gifted his buddies less tax.....ie decreased revenue.
None of which we are in disagreement of. My point is that this type of thread is counterproductive. In many ways it feels like the same idiocy of everyone saying how Trump didn't have a chance, or even Brexit. I fail to see the worth in trying to make something that is a threat out to not be one.
According to the OP, the wall wouldn't be able to do anything in the time left and be easily rectified later, along with further supporting replies to that affect. Wouldn't that kind of mentality actually encourage people on the fence to say just give him the damn wall instead because it's not worth it over something trivial?
Isn't this the same kind of crap that Acosta got wrapped up in just recently?
Give in now shows that GOP can bully Dems into getting their way.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment