Trump's BIG flip flop: The Approach

Donald Trump campaign: ‘Softening’ on illegal immigration more approach than policy
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/28/donald-trump-campaign-softening-on-illegal-immigra/

By S.A. Miller - The Washington Times - Sunday, August 28, 2016
Donald Trump’s campaign manager said Sunday that the Republican presidential nominee is not backing off his tough stance on illegal immigration but is re-examining the need for a new deportation force.
“He’s going to build the wall, no amnesty, no citizenship, no more sanctuary cities,” Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway said on “Fox News Sunday.”
“The softening is more approach than policy,” she said. “We want to find a fair and humane way, and if you enforce the law and you deal with those agencies that already exist to enforce the law, then we’ll will see what we’ve got.”

 

So he's going to do what Obama is already doing with the resources Obama is currently using. Good job Donald!

 

Trump will no longer call for the deporation of ALL illiegal aliens in the USA.

he will focus on deporting the criminals, and find a compromise on the non-criminals.


...just as we are doing now.

 

he he... i don't think Trump mentions that to the Trump Cultists.

 

Trump is evolving as a political figure however he is largely responsible for his own funding. Remember, Hillary has had decades of experience working within the political system. A system that has resulted in loss of life in Lybia, the arming of ISIS, a failed health-car government program, 19+ Trillion in debt and rising, the weakest market recovery ever reported, chaos in the mid-east that is spilling over to US, a still-porous Southern border, and influx of Syrian refugees some of whom may be looking to undermine our country. Vote for Hillary and you just get more of the same. Hillary has obviously been involved in selling U.S. influence for ridiculously high prices asked-for and paid for speeches by her and Bill Clinton gave. And yes...I realize she has not been indicted of anything...Not surprising really the Clintons have insulated themselves long before anyone had any inkling just who they were. Unlike Truman's 'the buck stops here' sign....With the Clintons it's 'the buck never got here' and they are sooooooooo good at that.

 

Where is the flip flop?

 

Despite the chronic kvetchers, most Americans approve of the job the president they twice elected is doing.

Admittedly, after 9/11, his disastrous, fraudulently-pretexted nation-building fiasco in Iraq, and the monumental economic collapse by the time Bush absconded, it was not a tough act to follow.

As for the raging reality tv performer morphing into Obama, it is amusing.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flatulence.

 

So Trump's basically following the status quo...lmao. So much for him being so "anti establishment".

 

Your google machine must be broken?

"They have to go." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie_4mV0jpNI (start 0:32)

Last week, "we'll work with them":

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ernment-can-work-with-illegal-immigrants.html

So kick-them-out-without-exception is not quite the same thing as they-can-pay-taxes-and-we'll-work-with-them. Is it?

 

This is a carbon copy approach like Obama, except Obama didn't waste billions on a wall. Thank you Obama!

 

Tell us you didn't really ask that question?

 

I prefer to observe the same source as the claimant so we can objectively review the exact same evidence.

Specifically what does Trump mean when he says we will work with them?

 

I really asked it, and you really dodged answering it.

 

It is Trump who is dodging that question. Repeatedly.

All we know for sure is that he made a change that he sees as significant.

So, we have a definite self proclaimed flip flop with no real definition of what he flipped to this time.

 

Specifically what does Trump mean when he says we will work with them?

 

As was pointed out to you, that is a silly question.

Even if anyone knew what he meant when he said that, we know he didn't mean it before and there is no reason he means that today or in the future.

 

Yes about 1/2...Which also mirrors the country's political/philosophical split. The main stream media is mostly liberal so one can assume that the results will always be skewed to the left because most folks don't know how left-biased the media really is.

After 9/11 Americans were feeling like the aftermath of Pearl Harbor and wondering where the next attack would come from. President Bush protected us and was fully supported in going into Iraq. Do I really need to post all the Democrat names that supported the Iraq invasion? What excuses do you give them?

Obama has already morphed into a toad, digging his hole to wait out the Winter.

 

He isn't self funding anything.

 

More than half of the American electorate voted for the President twice, and more than half approve of his job performance at present.

Contrast that with his predecessor who was twice elected and was being accorded 30% approval/68% disapproval at this stage of his tenure.

That is what the naïve and paranoid like to tell one another. In reality, the corporate world of media is profit-driven. Ideological proselytizers in the media are niche-marketers that target selected audiences that comprise a wide variety of political persuasions - although the bloviators dominating the airwaves are overwhelmingly right-wing entertainers. Whatever is preached is directed at profit, and if the media companies were not successfully marketing their products, they would change products. They are running businesses, not religions.

No, he was far from being "fully supported" as multiple polls attest.

Bush's Iraq scheme was opposed by many Democrats. (His Iraq War Resolution received 82 Democratic yeas and 126 nays in the House, and 29 yeas and 21 nays in the Senate,) and many who went along with the Bush and surrendered the power to him to invade Iraq, Republicans and Democrats alike, now admit their mistake. Even the reality tv performer heading the GOP ticket has called the Bush a liar in regard to the false pretexts, and now pretends to have opposed the Bush fiasco that he had supported.

Your conflating the disparate matters of the terrorist attack that occurred on the Bush's watch (after 8 months of his ignoring the al Qaeda threat) and his fraudulently-pretexted nation-building fiasco in Iraq is noted. It is as if President Roosevelt had exploited the Pearl Harbor attack to justify invading Venezuela.

I don't know if you toe any or all of the party line concerning the President's being a foreign-born, madrasa-indoctrinated African witch doctor who was the founder of ISIS, but you are certainly justified to be critical of him in a number of actual matters.

In any event, maligning the President is as misdirected as the Iraq fiasco. The thread addresses the reality tv entertainer's fickle immigration declarations.


.

 

And as I pointed out, that is a dodge.

 

Except Obama hasn't enforced the law for 8 years.
Meanwhile.illegals are in front of me @ Walmart with $260 worth of groceries paid with EBT.They have steaks and shrimp and lobster.
And I have ham and beans and my bill is $106 and I pay cash.
That's the reality of the situation.
I'm not saying all illegals roll like that;but it's glaringly obvious some do.

 

still not much of a flip flop. he originally said he would kick them all out and then "expedite the good ones back in" so what has really changed? he is not going to spend the $$ to kick the good ones out just to let them back in? ok the end result is still the same but now its cheaper.. win win

 

That was then...this is now. Nice try though. Obama's policies have mostly failed including the huge klunker Obamacare. People are getting fed up with him and his radical progressive liberalism AND his obvious racist attitude.

There you go again...Blame it on Bush...

http://www.conservativedailynews.co...ump-violence-is-a-yawn-for-the-leftist-press/

"More Leftist, Anti-Trump Violence Is a Yawn For The Leftist Press"

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/y...w-it-affected-the-cnbc-debate/article/2575340

"The New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC — the largest media outlets with the exception of Fox News — all slant clearly left. So do a vast majority of other major newspapers and magazines. I'm not talking about their opinion pages, but about their news operations."

Only the stupid and/or ignorant insulate themselves from the truth by calling the truth-tellers 'naive and paranoid.' The MSM has, by far, the largest demographic mainly because of the historical infrastructure of communications that gives them the most coverage. When you spout liberalism from the biggest blowtorch while feigning impartiality, you can influence a whole population...Just ask Goebbles.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/281832.Joseph_Goebbels

"It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”
― Joseph Goebbels

Not that the free press is exactly equal to the Nazi press but the principle remains. Those who control the press control the demographic thinking. The advent of conservative talk radio and FOX is a direct challenge to the powerful, press status quo.

He was fully supported by congress (elected officials) including many many democrats.

You can cry all you want but the fact remains that many of the most powerful Democrats agreed with him. Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to name a few. Democrats who supported the Iraq war have convenient amnesia today.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...orget-supporting-the-iraq-war/article/2564830

"A new poll shows that Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to forget that they once supported the Iraq war.

According to a new Economist/YouGov poll, 63 percent of Americans supported a ground invasion of Iraq in 2003 to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Now, as the popularity of that war has waned significantly, just 38 percent recall admitting they supported sending troops to Iraq in 2003."/I]

Looks like the liberal MSM brainwashing is almost complete. Like most liberal issues, repetition of a lie over and over makes it 'truth'....And....If they can make up a slogan (like Black Lives Matter) even if it is based on a lie.....And....concoct a chant libbies will drop the truth like a hot potato.

Nonsense....the biggest 'ignorer' would be Bill Clinton that COULD have actually captured Bin Laden but was too busy getting a blow job.

Obama is a weak President and a failure no matter what color or religion he is or claims to be. Hillary is more of the same with the twist of being slimy and corrupt.

 

Under Obama, the influx of new residents stopped!!

It had been rising continuously since Reagan.

You should be asking how he accomplished that while NOT spending tens of billions of our tax dollars on building a wall.

 

How soon until Trump's Wall comes a'tumbling down????

http://therightscoop.com/msnbc-trump-surrogates-now-say-trump-is-talking-about-a-virtual-wall/