sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 1:58pm
Neither is ignoring questions you don't like the answer to.QuakerOats;1849685 wrote:MAGA
Denial is not the answer
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Apr 25, 2017 2:05pm
Queens-based architect Vijay Duggal wants to cover the barrier with solar panels and wind turbines to generate electricity, thereby addressing the controversy over who will pay for the wall. “I think Mexico will come as an investment partner, not as a reimburser. It really changes the dynamics of the debate,” he said.
More good ideas from the private sector .............thanks for getting folks thinking, Don. Protect the republic, and generate energy that liberals like ---- win/win.
https://www.6sqft.com/11-new-york-based-firms-bid-to-build-trumps-border-wall/
More good ideas from the private sector .............thanks for getting folks thinking, Don. Protect the republic, and generate energy that liberals like ---- win/win.
https://www.6sqft.com/11-new-york-based-firms-bid-to-build-trumps-border-wall/
CenterBHSFan
Posts: 6,115
Apr 25, 2017 3:21pm
From everything I've read and saw, bigotry was not the reason Trump won. Remember, there were many people who voted for Obama that also voted for Trump so that exposes bigotry as the reason for Trump's election as a fraud.
If you want to call into question bigotry as it relates to a candidate, call into account Hillary and her campaign crew who wanted to make a fuss about Sander being Jewish. For that matter, call into account the whole damn democrat party for putting up Hillary Clinton to begin with.
What you are doing is not the way to protest the fact that Trump is now President. But do not repine for that fact, somebody else that might be worse will come along in our lifetimes.
If you want to call into question bigotry as it relates to a candidate, call into account Hillary and her campaign crew who wanted to make a fuss about Sander being Jewish. For that matter, call into account the whole damn democrat party for putting up Hillary Clinton to begin with.
What you are doing is not the way to protest the fact that Trump is now President. But do not repine for that fact, somebody else that might be worse will come along in our lifetimes.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 5:36pm
Okay so you disagree with the published study? Got it. So what is your evidence to support your opinion?CenterBHSFan;1849711 wrote:From everything I've read and saw, bigotry was not the reason Trump won. Remember, there were many people who voted for Obama that also voted for Trump so that exposes bigotry as the reason for Trump's election as a fraud.
If you want to call into question bigotry as it relates to a candidate, call into account Hillary and her campaign crew who wanted to make a fuss about Sander being Jewish. For that matter, call into account the whole damn democrat party for putting up Hillary Clinton to begin with.
What you are doing is not the way to protest the fact that Trump is now President. But do not repine for that fact, somebody else that might be worse will come along in our lifetimes.
And the Democratic voters put up Hillary Clinton. Do you know how primaries work?
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 25, 2017 6:33pm
Washington Post. Lol
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Apr 25, 2017 6:45pm
Yea gtfo with wapo. And how many times has it been proven that counties that shifted voted for obama twice. But Race!
There's no doubt there IS racism, but it had no bearing on the election. And BLM will only create more.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's no doubt there IS racism, but it had no bearing on the election. And BLM will only create more.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 7:05pm
There is a link to the study if you'd like to read it.SportsAndLady;1849736 wrote:Washington Post. Lol
Sorry you are so ignorant.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 7:05pm
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-25/trump-s-sanctuary-cities-order-blocked-by-federal-judge?utm_content=politics&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-politics
So much winning.A judge in San Francisco blocked President Donald Trump from withholding funds from so-called sanctuary cities that give safe harbor to undocumented immigrants, marking the administration’s second major policy initiative declared likely unconstitutional.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 25, 2017 7:11pm
Fraud sleeper once again...sleeper;1849681 wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/04/17/racism-motivated-trump-voters-more-than-authoritarianism-or-income-inequality/?utm_term=.a5b18d73cdc7
Reality. Sorry you don't like it.
sleeper;1823351 wrote:It's absolutely absurd to me the amount of blame against white people, particularly white males.
HEY LIBERALS, STOP BLAMING WHITE PEOPLE FOR YOUR OWN PROBLEMS. That's why you lost to frekaing donald J Trump. ffs.
iclfan2;1823358 wrote:The whole racist, sexist angle just pisses me off. The state of SC votes for a minority (Indian) woman governor and a black male republican senator, but they're racist or sexist for not voting Obama or Hillary. Laughable.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
sleeper;1823359 wrote:Identity politics. It's the D's main weapon.
sleeper;1823130 wrote:A couple of thoughts:
1) One of the reasons that I(and most people) were so confident is the data was strongly in favor of Clinton from Day 1 and leading up to Monday night. If you work for a polling firm, you may be looking for a new job come today/end of the week. There's clearly a massive flaw in polling methodologies and I daresay it's like either that polling centers have become ultra partisan and/or a majority of people surveyed said Clinton but ended up notching Trump on the ballot due to fear of being ostracized for their choice. The question "How did we miss so badly" will be studied for decades and whoever can answer this question has an opportunity to seize the polling market and become stupid rich.
2) I think the Democrat strategy of identity politics ultimately backfired right in their faces. Continuously blaming white people for all the world's problems and calling anyone who supports Trump(or conservative ideas) a racist/bigot/sexist really brought out white voters in mass against Clinton. The statistic was Clinton only got 51% of college educated white women, which is a demographic she was expected to absolutely shit stomp in giving Trump's comments/actions against women; what happened here? Where are all the people who voted for Obama?
3) I'll give credit to Trump. He spent nowhere near the money Clinton did, defied odds to win the Republican nomination, defied odds to win the Presidency, and did it by being openly racist/sexist and a general asshole. This will be studied for decades.
4) We're fucked.
sleeper;1823558 wrote:Could it be that Trump voters were willing to ignore his bigotry and sexism to focus on issues that were more important to them, like the economy and the corruption of DC politics.
I know its shocking to Clinton supporters, but there are other issues out there than just making sure minorities and women don't get their feelz hurt.
sleeper;1823561 wrote:More identity politics. More blaming white people.
That's how you get a Trump in the White House.
sleeper;1823835 wrote:But no problem with Hillary calling black people super predators or half of America deplorables.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 7:11pm
Immigration Ban
Immigration Ban
Build Border Wall
Repeal Obamacare
Sanctuary City Ban
Fail.
#Winning
Immigration Ban
Build Border Wall
Repeal Obamacare
Sanctuary City Ban
Fail.
#Winning
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Apr 25, 2017 7:13pm
Yea, we should be for justices being completely partisan. You're an idiot. Obama appointed judge, in California. I'm sure everyone is shocked
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 7:15pm
Right, Obama's fault, not the 3rd unconstituional EO that Donald Trump has signed. Grow up.iclfan2;1849749 wrote:Yea, we should be for justices being completely partisan. You're an idiot. Obama appointed judge, in California. I'm sure everyone is shocked
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Apr 25, 2017 7:20pm
It isn't unconstitutional. It's one moron in California abusing his power.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 7:21pm
Facts don't care about your feelings. It is unconstitutional.iclfan2;1849751 wrote:It isn't unconstitutional. It's one moron in California abusing his power.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 25, 2017 7:51pm
I'm so confused was it the Russians or racist white people?
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 25, 2017 7:57pm
Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal law?sleeper;1849752 wrote:Facts don't care about your feelings. It is unconstitutional.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 8:09pm
You are welcome to read the ruling of why it is unconstitutional.majorspark;1849762 wrote:Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal law?
Here it is:
The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds. Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive. Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 25, 2017 8:23pm
I don't have a problem with this ruling. Its nice to see leftist judges humping the 10th.sleeper;1849764 wrote:You are welcome to read the ruling of why it is unconstitutional.
Now answer my question. I'll be more specific in case you misunderstood. Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal immigration law?
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Apr 25, 2017 8:28pm
There's a difference between those who disagree with his stance on immigration because it was a poorly planned and executed and those who simply want to leave it as it is (basically, ignore it). I'm fine with the former, it's probably the most fair take. It's just as ignorant to pretend that our policies as they have been enforced the last 8 years have been a good thing.
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Apr 25, 2017 8:32pm
There needs to be a clear definition of what constitutes "enforcement." If I'm caught with an ounce of weed, and later, it's found out that I'm here illegally, don't think a charge on that level warrants "enforcement" of our current immigration policy. The cost outweighs the benefits in these cases because the cost of fair treatment across the board is astronomical.majorspark;1849767 wrote:I don't have a problem with this ruling. Its nice to see leftist judges humping the 10th.
Now answer my question. I'll be more specific in case you misunderstood. Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal immigration law?
What I don't understand is the defense of sanctuary cities (or states) on people who are caught for more serious issues and the blatant lack of cooperation with I.C.E. Lets start with the prisons. If you're here illegally, have a felony conviction and are in prison, the process to deport you should begin. There are certain circumstances that can be subject to the judicial review process or appeal, but the default should be looking to deport.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 8:49pm
I'm not a lawyer so I'll let the legal experts debate that one.majorspark;1849767 wrote:I don't have a problem with this ruling. Its nice to see leftist judges humping the 10th.
Now answer my question. I'll be more specific in case you misunderstood. Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal immigration law?
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 25, 2017 9:20pm
Interesting you defer to the legal experts on this particular constitutional question but not on others. Why might that be given your previous comments?sleeper;1849779 wrote:I'm not a lawyer so I'll let the legal experts debate that one.
sleeper;1849750 wrote:Right, Obama's fault, not the 3rd unconstituional EO that Donald Trump has signed. Grow up.
sleeper;1849752 wrote:Facts don't care about your feelings. It is unconstitutional.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 25, 2017 9:54pm
I've deferred to the legal experts on all 3 of Trump's unconstitutional EO.majorspark;1849786 wrote:Interesting you defer to the legal experts on this particular constitutional question but not on others. Why might that be given your previous comments?
Keep defending him though. Party over country!
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 25, 2017 10:00pm
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227?qt-us_code_temp_noupdates=0#qt-us_code_temp_noupdatesAzubuike24;1849771 wrote:There needs to be a clear definition of what constitutes "enforcement."
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 25, 2017 10:22pm
Name them.sleeper;1849789 wrote:I've deferred to the legal experts on all 3 of Trump's unconstitutional EO.