What would it take for you to switch?

You probably mean those who are illegals. But the legals spend time in line, doing forms, passing tests so they have the right to enter the USA.

 

That makes no sense about the EC within your comment and my reply.

If half of your commentary is correct, though, it makes a good argument for eliminating the EC.

 

All the processes at the border should be sped up.. not lessened just sped up.
Except for commercial traffic. That should be slowed to combat drug trafficing.

 

So you uphold a power grab by the Republican far right mid America?

 

There is no good argument for eliminating the EC.

 

Illegals per law have no legal standing. Counting them bakes the cake tilting for Democrats. That is wrong. To deliberately tilt to just one party using a count of illegals is totally wrong.

I have no objections to the EC as a way to more equitably treat all states, For instance currently I am registered to vote in CA. But I live in Idaho. i shall not vote in CA. Idaho has a more faceted system that forces me to ID myself as an American citizen. Idaho has under 2 million residents. But here republicans have excellent chances to win. I want Idaho as strong as is CA. Best way to try is to keep the EC.

 

You just made one, Robert E. Allen.

 

No, actually the vast majority of the land mass is clearly red. Most of Oregon Washington and California are red.

Yes it matters we are a republic not a democracy.

 

Sure there is. It comes right after the most important argument:The Office of President has to go.

Eliminate most of the Federal Government and allow the independent States to operate as Nation States, or similar. All decisions can be made by Congress.

Legalize secession. If the US trumpers want is so great, then let's see who really wants to remain a part of it.

 

Illegals settle in all states. CA, IL, and NY are blue, and will remain so. AZ, GA, NC, and FL are becoming blue, but illegals don't vote.

 

People not land vote.

 

No.

 

Yes but the vote should represent all the people..

 

Here is a major problem.

The border laws of America?

Generally safe to say they are the creation of Democrats. Since 1933 your Democratic party has held America Hostage on creating laws.

Democrats created the Bracero program for Mexicans to use. But killed it off later.

About
The Bracero Program, which brought millions of Mexican guest workers to the United States, ended more than four decades ago. Current debates about immigration policy-including discussions about a new guest worker program-have put the program back in the news and made it all the more important to understand this chapter of American history. Yet while top U.S. and Mexican officials re- examine the Bracero Program as a possible model, most Americans know very little about the program, the nation's largest experiment with guest workers. Indeed, until very recently, this important story has been inadequately documented and studied, even by scholars.

The Bracero Program grew out of a series of bi-lateral agreements between Mexico and the United States that allowed millions of Mexican men to come to the United States to work on, short-term, primarily agricultural labor contracts. From 1942 to 1964, 4.6 million contracts were signed, with many individuals returning several times on different contracts, making it the largest U.S. contract labor program. An examination of the images, stories, documents and artifacts of the Bracero Program contributes to our understanding of the lives of migrant workers in Mexico and the United States, as well as our knowledge of, immigration, citizenship, nationalism, agriculture, labor practices, race relations, gender, sexuality, the family, visual culture, and the Cold War era.

The Bracero Program was created by executive order in 1942 because many growers argued that World War II would bring labor shortages to low-paying agricultural jobs. On August 4, 1942 the United States concluded a temporary intergovernmental agreement for the use of Mexican agricultural labor on United States farms (officially referred to as the Mexican Farm Labor Program), and the influx of legal temporary Mexican workers began. But the program lasted much longer than anticipated. In 1951, after nearly a decade in existence, concerns about production and the U.S. entry into the Korean conflict led Congress to formalize the Bracero Program with Public Law 78.

The Bracero Program was controversial in its time. Mexican nationals, desperate for work, were willing to take arduous jobs at wages scorned by most Americans. Farm workers already living in the United States worried that braceros would compete for jobs and lower wages. In theory, the Bracero Program had safeguards to protect both Mexican and domestic workers for example, guaranteed payment of at least the prevailing area wage received by native workers; employment for three-fourths of the contract period; adequate, sanitary, and free housing; decent meals at reasonable prices; occupational insurance at employer's expense; and free transportation back to Mexico at the end of the contract. Employers were supposed to hire braceros only in areas of certified domestic labor shortage, and were not to use them as strikebreakers. In practice, they ignored many of these rules and Mexican and native workers suffered while growers benefited from plentiful, cheap, labor. Between the 1940s and mid 1950s, farm wages dropped sharply as a percentage of manufacturing wages, a result in part of the use of braceros and undocumented laborers who lacked full rights in American society.

http://braceroarchive.org/about

 

How can you even make such authoritative remarks as to claim they do not vote. Do you have a magic device to know that?

California my former state deserves a chance to get away from the Democrats iron fisted ruling party. How can you discuss fair for voting when you will admit they have iron fist control over CA and other states?

 

Show me 100 who have voted? You can't. Illegals simply do not effect elections because they don't vote.

Texas Dems and feel the same as do California Pubs.

 

no misquote there and you know it

had Obama of said that the right would be up in arms

 

So they are both wrong, no matter what the consequences it's wrong to take property without due process.

 

Key Takeaways: Republic vs. Democracy

• Republics and democracies both provide a political system in which citizens are represented by elected officials who are swon to protect their interests.
• In a pure democracy, laws are made directly by the voting majority leaving the rights of the minority largely unprotected.
• In a republic, laws are made by representatives chosen the people and must comply with a constitution which specifically protects the rights of the minority from the will of the majority.
• The United States, while basically a republic, is best described as a “representative democracy.”

 

Seriously, you need to study the American political system. The president not only cannot overturn federal statutes, he is obligated by the Constitution to uphold and enforce federal statutes even if he disagrees with them. This is why Obama should have been impeached, for refusing to enforce our immigration laws. We are a nation of laws, not of men. The Congress is the legislative branch of government, it makes the laws. The President is the executive branch of government, he carries out the laws. The president has zero power to make or overturn laws. You and AOC need a remedial course in American government.

 

The only way I'd ever vote Democrat would be if the Democratic candidate was more conservative than the Republican. I've only known one election in my lifetime where this occurred, in Massachusetts between Joe Silber and William Weld for governor, and I wasn't a resident of the state when it occurred, so I have never voted for any Democrat, ever.

 

What if he did that and promised you a free ride in life?

 

You are mistaken.

Obama enforced the immigration laws and caught and returned more deportees to their nations than any President in history including Trump.

 

What if a Democrat agreed to burn the Constitution, execute all illegals, form a alliance with Kim Jong Un, nuke England, and use torture as a deterrent to crime. Would you support the Dem?

 

Oh, really? Cohn helped him build Trump Tower and all of his Golf Courses and resorts around the world? I don't think so. Cohn was an employee, not some sort of mastermind behind the Trump Organization.

I can take any politician or human being in the public eye and point to stupid things that have been said or have been said, corrected or taken completely out of context to fit my narrative that "XYZ person is stupid". I actually had a flight instructor tell me: "Don't worry of you hit the ground, you'll be alright". Was he "really dumb and unqualified" or did he just make an offhand and incorrect remark which we later laughed about because obviously, he wasn't thinking through what he just said. I knew what he meant. Many times politicians or people in the public eye misspeak or say things that they later correct. Speaking offhand continually in front of cameras is very difficult to do. Answering questions constantly and being attacked daily is very difficult to put up with. Of course, useless and stupid statements will be made.

The fact that you focus on this and not on the actions the President is more akin to you, not him.

Trump is in a war to keep our Intellectual Property from being stolen and is at the center of the trade talks with China. Trump is correct. We lose trillions a year in theft to China. It's the right thing to do. You lambasting him for trying to fix trade deals, IMO, is shortsighted. Democrats not helping him secure our borders or help to unify America against foreign entities, IMO, is very damaging.