Republicans are pro human sacrifice and pederasty with little boys. They also think non-white people are racially inferior and women should stay in the kitchen where they belong. Its true. You just have to read between the lines.
Dude... What I was telling you in my original response is Trump doesn't care about the wall or border security because he preferred to use his initial position of power (GOP majority in congress and senate) to reduce his own tax bill instead of immigration issue that he promised so loudly to solve - it saves HIM alone 5 billion dollars in the long run. And considering that all he is asking for atm is 5 billions to reopen United States government, his trumped up crisis can't really qualify as such, because 5 billions is not the type of money that a real national crisis can be solved with. He is SCAMMING you. Do you really think that he couldn't figure out a way to get 5 billions out of republican congress being the great deal maker he is over the last 2 years? Do you really think that this caravan (that he didn't even mention in his national address) is some sort of unsolvable crisis for the great UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? You are contending that Obama & HRC is status quo. BUT "status quo" is not socialism - your original point was "we elected Trump to protect ourselves from some new crazy socialist take over" and that is simply not true - "status quo" IS NOT a new crazy socialist take over. NOW in reaction to Trump, we might be getting a true Socialist to win democratic primary. All you did by electing him was bringing turmoil to our country - he couldn't even repeal Obama care. You haven't addressed any of my points logically. You just had some untold issue with me saying "little illegal immigration "crisis"". So I will have to stop responding now, because I find it emotionally draining talking to people who don't appear to be listening to people or making sense in their responses to them. Which is probably how democrats feel trying to negotiate with Trump. I feel for them. Have a good day.
When all your told are buzz words and short statements and don't understand what they actually mean, you get responses like the one you're fighting with. Its parroting with no understanding, and while it's cute from a bird it's depressing to see in an adult. Trump isn't a swamp draining communist fighting successful businessman. He's a conartist. Don't get me wrong, he's good at the con, but let's not pretend he's anything more than that. If he cons other nations into doing things good for us great, but from what I've seen so far is that he's been made by everyone else except his base. Sad!
I already did...nobody bother reading them. I then did it again. How many times should I bother doing it? Let's go back over the more recent one (the previous post linked literally hundreds of articles): "Let's take a look at just one example, and from Democratic leadership: "Walls are immoral". Ok, what do walls do? They form a barrier (ie, close a border). Yet that is immoral. The ONLY conclusion one can logically draw from that, then, is that open borders are in fact the 'moral' solution. Why would Pelosi say such a thing, if a great number of people in her caucus didn't believe that?" So, again....if walls are immoral, and what walls do is close borders...how is that not being in support of open ('moral') borders? In fact, how is that not against any and all forms of border control? ie, what makes any other form of border control 'moral', if walls are immoral, and what they do is control the border? It's really hard to view that statement as anything but a position in favor of open borders. here are some of the links again: Yes, the Democrats Are for Open Borders Yes, Democrats Are Now The Party Of Open Borders "Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., isn’t on the fringe of the Left. He is the second ranking member of the Democratic National Committee and he basically wears his immigration policy on his sleeve. More specifically, the No. 2 Democrat wore a T-Shirt that literally said “I don’t believe in borders.” Calls for open borders wind up closing doors for Democrats "Troublingly, these views on immigration are not far out of line with the Democratic Party as a whole. In fact, a Harvard Harris poll last month states that a striking 36 percent of Democrats support “basically open borders.” So, yes, many people (millions) within the Democratic Party support open borders. This is without getting into indirect support, which is support of programs which either encourage people to cross the border illegally, or help them get through via other means: "As a Salvadoran illegal alien who was released by the Border Patrol after crossing into Texas told my colleague Jerry Kammer in 2014: “We were watching CNN, and they were saying that the United States was giving opportunities to women with children. And since some neighbors of ours had come, we decided to try it.” The ruse these illegal immigrants have been using to get released is an asylum claim. Even though the vast majority of the claims are clearly without merit (and half of those released in order to pursue their applications never bother to follow through), the Left, both in and out of government, has encouraged their filing, and the prolongation of cases." The reality is that to some degree, dachuda's take on why Democrats are so supportive of illegal immigrants has some truth to it. Create programs that people are beholden to, and you create support for yourself with them. One might argue that this isn't the sole factor, or even the main factor, but one would have to be naive to think it's no factor at all in many programs Democrats propose around immigration. All of which are, to some degree, supportive of open borders.
It's possible I didn't understand everything you were saying. If I could offer advice: avoid huge blocks of texts. My eyes tend to glaze. Think about this. You have a steak dinner. What do you have to do to eat the steak? That's right, cut or break it up. Same with reading, which is actually another form of consumption. Think: bite sized chunks. [See how I broke up those these segments?] One thing I have learned: if you want somebody to read something, make it easy for them to read. This has nothing to do with the complexity of a thought. It has to do with consumability, esp. on a message board. I'll have to address your points later.
Must be the reason why people like Trump win elections. All their policies fit within a couple of twitter posts. They should start including adderall on insurance policies like they do contraception.
Trump, along with everyone else, deserves a tax cut. The bigger the better. Actually, it is. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare are redistributionist programs. Some may quibble about definitions of socialism, but anything that is redistributionist is socialist. Maybe it was because you were ignoring obvious facts (the caravan) and belittling my post. That could have had something to do with it. You too.
See, you're doing what I knew you would do: defend your writing style on the basis of "complexity." But no, there's no justification for walls of text. This isn't the place for a tome or blocks of text. In a book, maybe. This is a website, not a book. If I may: You need to let sentences "breathe." This has nothing to do with left or right; it has everything to do with effective communication.
In this Harvard poll (which has been quoted by Republicans for pro-wall arguments), 68% of Democrats answered 'secure borders' when asked, "Do you think we should have basically open borders or do you think we need secure borders?" (it looks like the survey gave respondents no room to point out that the question was a false dichotomy, but whatever). But I guess your argument is that the Democratic legislators are more radical than their voting base. Like this article, you might point out some vague inferences, like inferring that AOC wants open borders because she calls for the abolition of ICE. If they are really for open borders though, I'd like to see a real statement on it -- a quote, a web link, or whatever. I don't see how they're going to get this open border objective done when their own voters don't know they're supposed to want it.
The way I see it is that they are doing it one step at a time so that it'll be much like the frog in a pot on the stove, if the temperature changes quickly, the frog jumps out of the pot....if it changes gradually, he stays there and boils. The first step is to get the base opposing border security measures that are vital once they are completely on board with that you get them to start opposing ICE and supporting sanctuary cities and even states then once they are completely on board with that you start to push for amnesty for illegal immigrants and once they are completely on board with that you push for the elimination of borders entirely. If you look at AOC and the DSA that she's a member of, they are outright socialists (not fake socialists like Bernie Sanders), they advocate for the eventual elimination of capitalism but they seek to do so over a long period of time step by step. When it comes to the extremists on the left they've taken a similar tactic when it comes to several issues, but we shouldn't lose sight of their actual goals. Here's a tweet by the actual DSA chapter AOC was a member of explaining their goals. Now sure, this is just one example of an extremist politician and an extremist political group, but their support is rising on the left which means that eventually this could become the platform the Democrat party is running with before long if they are right about this being their future.
How is any of that related to any current policy being pushed? What lines are you even reading through?
