Trump Vows to End Birthright Citizenship

Are you not capable of talking about the other half? Or is it just convenient for you to leave it out?

 

I get that you want to keep making this same post in order to draw me back to this thread, but I dont care. Please stop.

Trump ain't going to unilaterally change the US constitution to end birthright and I bet you he never gets the 25 billion to pay for that ****ing wall. If either of those appear likely, then we can discuss the other half.

 

I just think that it is hilarious that you don't ask yourself why they ALL don't take planes CURRENTLY, but instead, many opting to go for the lethal desert option!

 

Due to a lack of continuing to defend your position, I have to assume that you now accept that according to that memo, dreamers are a "CRITICAL COMPONENT" of the Democrats' future!

 

I'll explain it again. I'll try to make it as simple as possible . Hopefully this will be simple enough for you to comprehend.

What didn't get far was a willingness of Democrats to consider giving amnesty to Dreamers and their families.

Is there any part of that I need to expand upon or break down?

 

It must be the long lines at the airport.

 

If you didn't actually comprehend that what the article said was that the hispanic vote is a critical componant of the Democratic party's future then my repeating it probably won't do much good at helping you understand.

 

Sorry, I may have misunderstood you. Yes, I agree with you that this is what it says. So if the Hispanic vote is a critical component of the Democratic party's future, doesn't it make sense why they are so soft on immigration? Is caring about the dreamers ALL about compassion for the Democrats? Or is caring about the dreamers much more about protecting their future?

 

Must be!

 

Yes, but was what Trump offered an official offer to Congress? The article that you posted just says that he "WILL propose a pathway to citizenship." (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/25/trump-amnesty-cover-18-million-dreamers/)

 

Are you through searching for nits to pick at?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and explain it to you in even simpler terms.

1. Since Amnesty wasn't going to get 100% acceptance by the Republicans, there would have to be a bipartisan deal.
2. Trump offered a deal to the Democrats that gave them almost 3 times as many Amnesties than they had been calling for in exchange for a wall and legislation to help stop future generations of "dreamers" from being brought to America against their will as children, (which again, is something Democrats say they wanted).
3. The Democrats rejected the agreement out of hand, refused to discuss it with the Trump WH, and started campaigning on the terrible plight of the "Poor Dreamers" that couldn't get amnesty.

I've explained it plenty of times, but I can't make you either understand it or admit that it is obviously true.

 

No evidence that the Democrats are any softer on immigration than the Republicans. Behaving in a decent manner with caring for others is not a sign of being soft but rather a sign of having a degree of humanity that seems to be missing in our current president.

That said opposing wasting tens of billions of dollars on an unnecessary wall seems to me to be only common sense when there are other more effective solutions to the issue of illegal immigration.

 

Democrats only oppose the bill for 3 reasons. Each of similar importance to them.
1. The wall will work.
2. You can't easily turn the wall off by defunding it.
3. It'll be a big America / Trump win.

The wall will pay for itself easily in welfare, law enforcement and education savings.

No evidence Democrsts w soft on immigration?

Who opposes the Wall, what's to abolish ICE, and supports Sanctuary Cities?

Need a hint?

 

The entire history of our war on drugs and illegal immigration is littered with sure fixes that didn't work. Fifty plus billion for a stupid fence we can predict in advance.

 

Who ever told you "sure fixes"? Nobody, right?

Tell San Diego Democrats the wall doesn't work. They know better. They demand a wall.

 

What was DACA if not being soft on immigration?

Right, because the democrats have proposed "more effective solutions?"

What do you mean "predict in advance?"

 

Can American REALLY afford to make education savings? I've seen some of the schools in America, and they're not a pretty sight!

 

I understand all of that, but was the deal offered by Trump brought before Congress?

 

ESL is costing a fortune and lowering results.

 

Bringing up a bill for theatrical purposes that you understand would be dead on arrival was not Trump's intent, obviously.

 

The DACA is about children who grew up in America. Has nothing to do with current or future immigrants. Try to remember that dealing with illegal immigrants who are already in the US is an entirely separate issue from developing effective methods to control future immigration.

Predict in advance means if the government claims it can build Trump's fence for 25 billion we know it will cost at least double. And any solution is better than wasting 50 billion on a fence that there is no reason to believe will actually be effective.

 

Yes if you build a wall in one area illegals will move to another area. Proves absolutly nothing about Trump's fence?

 

How can negative rhetoric towards an idea, brought up in the media, accurately reflect the results of an actual future vote in congress?

Cost being the salary of ESL teachers? What are you proposing? That these teachers be scrapped?

 

How about having them teach American children?

Didn't think of that, did you?

FYI, the cost of ESL children is far greater than the teachers salaries.

 

ESL teachers teaching American children?

What do you mean "the cost of ESL children?" How do they cost money?