U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-05-2018, 02:08 PM
 
Location: DFW - Coppell / Las Colinas
32,019 posts, read 36,681,542 times
Reputation: 38661

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibby View Post
President Trump will "get a third" next year - we will see after that how many he "gets".
I feel that Clarence Thomas will announce his retirement sometime in 2019.
We need to make sure our fellow Texans get out to vote. Not a good year to take things for granted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2018, 03:02 PM
 
Location: Texas or Cascais, Portugal
3,424 posts, read 3,189,453 times
Reputation: 8294
Big fan of Beto here. Just saw him on Ellen. This man is not afraid to say what he believes, knowing full well that the RED state of Texas tends to consistently vote along party lines. How anyone can support Ted Cruz is beyond my comprehension. My hope is, that Beto “speaks” to those in Texas that normally don’t vote because they don’t see the point. Beto O’Rourke doesn’t lie, doesn’t pander to special interest groups, doesn’t avoid the truth, even when he knows being honest may not pay off. I hope my fellow Texans will invest a little time ( and perhaps even some money) to learn about and support this man. He could spark real change in this state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 03:11 PM
 
18,175 posts, read 11,153,762 times
Reputation: 9510
Quote:
Originally Posted by nurider2002 View Post
Big fan of Beto here. Just saw him on Ellen. This man is not afraid to say what he believes, knowing full well that the RED state of Texas tends to consistently vote along party lines. How anyone can support Ted Cruz is beyond my comprehension. My hope is, that Beto “speaks” to those in Texas that normally don’t vote because they don’t see the point. Beto O’Rourke doesn’t lie, doesn’t pander to special interest groups, doesn’t avoid the truth, even when he knows being honest may not pay off. I hope my fellow Texans will invest a little time ( and perhaps even some money) to learn about and support this man. He could spark real change in this state.
He sure is easier on the eyes than that toad Cruz. Honestly, he doesn't look like he belongs in Texas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 03:13 PM
 
15,740 posts, read 9,263,160 times
Reputation: 14228
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Getting rid of ICE has nothing to do with being for open borders. Almost no one, the majority of liberals included, want open borders. We just don't like things like 4th Amendment violations, kidnapping children and white nationalism tactics that conservatives have embraced these days. America has gotten very dumb and very nasty on this issue. We can do so much better as Americans and human beings. The fact that so many are choosing the opposite is enough to make anyone cynical as hell about the nation's future.
If you want to get rid of the entity that enforces the laws that protect our borders, then yes, you are for open borders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 03:47 PM
 
11,481 posts, read 8,455,244 times
Reputation: 7097
Some people think ICE just needs tweaking since it was created in response to 9-11.

We must always be vigilant regarding terrorism. Our main problem now is the Mexico border. Those who entered and stayed

on expired Visas need locating, too. IIRC, there are now 100,000 illegals from India in NYC.

I have never heard anybody lobby for open borders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Hougary, Texberta
8,602 posts, read 11,093,754 times
Reputation: 10316
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
If you want to get rid of the entity that enforces the laws that protect our borders, then yes, you are for open borders.
He doesn't want to get rid of Border Patrol or Customs and Border Protection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 05:23 PM
 
435 posts, read 104,140 times
Reputation: 395
Looking at that video, I think Cruz is using Trump's bronzer now. The guy will do anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 07:53 PM
 
1,386 posts, read 628,870 times
Reputation: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Obama's immigration policies, especially in his first term, were widely criticized by many, actually. Just because you didn't notice because you were too busy focusing on foot-on-desk-gate doesn't mean it wasn't happening. However, there were clear differences between what's been happening recently and what happened under Obama. Obama prioritized the deportation of felons, not families, students, kids, etc. He maintained the legal norm of allowing people to seek asylum without deportation. Any family separations were done only if/when they had serious criminal records or blood relations couldn't be established. Those separations were largely temporary and didn't lead to automatic deportation, none of which is true under Trump. Obama supported DACA, Trump doesn't. Obama supported immigration reform. Trump supports expensive walls. Obama didn't use nationalism or racism as foundations of his immigration policy. Trump does. And on and on it goes. So yes, Obama had some issues with immigration, but it is orders of magnitude worse on all fronts under Trump.
Besides, if you truly believed that Obama and Trump were the same on immigration, why was Obama constantly accused as being soft on immigration by Republicans/conservatives? It literally cannot be both. So when were you guys lying? Then or now? My guess is both times.





Wow, make assumptions much?




Living in a border state, I pay close attention to the effect illegal immigration has on our state, and it's citizens. Obama had so many loopholes in his approach to immigration, it wasn't even funny. Moving the Border Patrol officers away from the southern border, and "deportations" consisted of dropping illegals on the other side of the border, leaving them free to wade back across the Rio Grande. It was a joke.


When the left tries to make immigration enforcement racist, they come across as desperate, grasping at straws. News flash, many people that reside south of our border are brown. Nothing racist about that, it's just a fact.





Back to the OT: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0348585fb0db5


Beto is all about open borders. Surprise. Not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 08:56 PM
 
11,819 posts, read 3,220,138 times
Reputation: 4012
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
A president is elected for a 4-year term. There is no such thing in the Constitution or anywhere that says a president cannot nominate someone to the SC in his final year. There is nothing that supports what the Republicans did. They refused to adhere to their sworn duties as members of Congress. They were obligated to give the man a hearing. They could've easily done that and rejected Garland, but they had to give him the hearing. They chose not to at all. Republicans always do things like this, failing to realize that they're undermining their own position when power inevitably changes. Not only that, but failing to adhere to constitutional duties and long-established norms only further damages the system. What happens when the severe partisanship shown by Republicans becomes the norm? Do the parties simply refuse to confirm anyone nominated by the other party? How does the judicial branch not end up collapsing in that scenario? Republicans are doing serious, lasting damage.
They didn't refuse to adhere to their sworn duties. The Constitution reads 'Advice and Consent', but the Constitution doesn't specifically define what comprises 'Advice and Consent' in that context and, as such, whether the Senate has done so or not is a matter of opinion/in the eye of the beholder (and I'm neither a Republican, nor a Trump voter/supporter).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2018, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,105 posts, read 13,504,828 times
Reputation: 5783
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
If you want to get rid of the entity that enforces the laws that protect our borders, then yes, you are for open borders.
Or... you just want to see a better organization take its place that can both enforce laws without committing human and constitutional rights violations. It's a shame so many people think that is not worth trying for. Actually, it's more like a g-d tragedy. Issues like this really separate people into who they really are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top