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.
I realize that anything I say from the media is immediately going to be dismissed as "Fake News," but there are some details emerging of Schumer's talks with Trump. They met in person and had what appeared to be a promising talk. Schumer says he put the border wall funding on the table in exchange for DACA. They left on an optimistic note, with Schumer asking Trump to sell it to his folks. Some hours later, John Kelly called Schumer back and said no deal, it was still too liberal.
If this did in fact transpire in this manner... shouldn't both sides have taken it?
Feels like some hardliners basically blocked what would have been a reasonable compromise.
When it's in writing, passes in the House, passes in the Senate and Trump vetoes it, then you can say that. Otherwise you can't read if what's being said is true or just political maneuvering.
First, the sample was skewed WAY to the left, with approximately four times as many lefties as righties.
Second, the poll did not ask the question you are pretending to provide the results for. It asked a different question: i.e., whether DACA people should be allowed to stay in the country if they met certain conditions and were assessed an unspecified penalty. Since we have no idea what sort of penalty these people had in mind, there's no way to say that any of them support any given proposal regarding DACAs.
I realize that anything I say from the media is immediately going to be dismissed as "Fake News," but there are some details emerging of Schumer's talks with Trump. They met in person and had what appeared to be a promising talk. Schumer says he put the border wall funding on the table in exchange for DACA. They left on an optimistic note, with Schumer asking Trump to sell it to his folks. Some hours later, John Kelly called Schumer back and said no deal, it was still too liberal.
If this did in fact transpire in this manner... shouldn't both sides have taken it?
Feels like some hardliners basically blocked what would have been a reasonable compromise.
Same as having a pipe leak and wrapping duct tape around it.
When it's in writing, passes in the House, passes in the Senate and Trump vetoes it, then you can say that. Otherwise you can't read if what's being said is true or just political maneuvering.
you can say WHAT?
Try quoting who you are responding to, so we can understand what you are talking about.
The wall is stupid. The majority of illegal immigrants come here legally and overstay their visas. The wall is expensive placating that solves nothing but makes some people feel better.
You are exactly right. And we have pregnant women coming here from different countries only to give birth so their child will be a US citizen. And it's perfectly legal. We should be focusing on that not a wall.
You are exactly right. And we have pregnant women coming here from different countries only to give birth so their child will be a US citizen. And it's perfectly legal. We should be focusing on that not a wall.
Why can't we focus on more than area of immigration, legal and/or illegal?
The real issue is why is keeping the government functioning being held hostage by a bunch of petulant losers trying to aid foreign criminals? Dems should pass the continuing resolution for the good of the American people. Then start a clean bill dealing with illegal aliens, chain migration, doing away with the immigration lottery, DACA, merit based immigration, border security and the wall. No reason to tie funding the government to this.
Dunno. A lot is heresay, and a lot is conflicting.
Schumer seems to suggest it was the whole deal. Even if it wasn't at the time, he is publicly claiming now it was...so why doesn't Trump phone him and get this deal back on? DACA in exchange for the wall. Still some risk in Schumer getting D's to accept it, but why not try it?
Quote:
The Times wrote simply that Schumer “discussed the possibility of fully funding the president’s wall on the southern border with Mexico” — which leaves some wiggle room.
On the floor of the Senate on Saturday, though, Schumer explained that it was almost exactly that: A deal on those covered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that would also potentially fund the wall.
“On the thorniest issue, of immigration,” Schumer said, “the president said many times he would take a deal that had included DACA in exchange for the wall. I put that deal on the table in the Oval Office in a sincere effort at compromise. I put the wall on the table in exchange for strong DACA protections. … It was a generous offer.”
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.