Archy1221

So we are back to personal attacks on this site again. Cool. It was nice to see you actually read the article and could tell that two different countries were being talked about. Now, for a person in this country worth over $100 million advocating for doubling the minimum wage, one would think that same person would want to pay her own families company employees well above the current standard in Mexico. Unfortunately it seems to not be the case and looks to be about a full US $1 per hour below the average for unskilled labor in Mexico. If my math is wrong and her company pays more than average then I’ll delete the post and the original. If it’s not, then it would be nice for her to show us how it’s done from personal experience to pay employees more. Try and make a point next time without making it personal. The backhanded compliments went out of style long ago.

No idea their reasoning behind voting no, but for that tweeter to make it a race thingy shows how stupid people are about the subject and actually hurts the cause when racist things happen for real.

The 10 year yield seems to be agreeing that inflation could be a problem.

If the voting laws are legal and there is plenty of time allowed for people to vote, i.e...polls open weeks prior to Election Day, Voter ID is free, and everyone plays by the same rules on a mid-term election that’s 1 1/2 years away, a Presidential election that’s 3 1/2 years away so people have plenty of time to figure things out it’s not my fault nor any politicians fault if people choose to suppress their own vote. Get mad at those individuals. If the voting changes are deemed illegal then that’s a different story. If states charge for the voter ID, I will disagree with that. I mean, do people need their hand held to get to the voting booth now a days so it’s not considered voter suppression. Maybe you should ask people why they want to suppress their own vote by not getting to the voting booth when they have 3 weeks to do so and 3 1/2 years to plan for it. I’m sure that was telling.

If she get that strongly about the subject, one would think she would exit her position in the company and put her money into a different venture that pays employees better. She could also use her current bully pulpit to shame the majority owner (her father) into paying better wages. Doesn’t seem too misleading to me.

Are you gonna just conveniently look away from the Democrat run counties like Fulton when bringing up polling place reductions. If polling places in Georgia are reduced in majority Democrat counties, then probably want to blame county election commissioners which would probably be Democrats. Same thing in Philly. People like you love to put all the blame on Republicans without knowing what’s actually going on in many of the localities.

So speaking of shutting down polling places, it makes sense to cross reference where polling places are being closed in counties and who controls and is in charge of the polling places in those counties.

Ummmm....upset is an interesting choice of words. Kinda looks like this person joined the conversation then implies it’s weird for me to ask a question of said person. So, in conclusion I may not be the correct person to speak to about how message boards work. And no reason to apologize. You did nothing wrong except assume an intent I didn’t have, make a claim about me that you didn’t back up, and I understand you don’t really mean the sorry anyways. If you don’t mind, Could we get back to the actual discussion instead of this?

So after those words, it sounds like you do not think that every legal voter still has the same right to legally vote and that there is plenty of time to get things in order to vote and plenty of time to vote once polls open for early voting since you didn’t address it.

If a Republican Attorney General or Homeland Security Secretary said that, similar to a Democrat Homeland Security Secretary talking about his own party, I would certainly take notice. Surprised you don’t.

Because it’s not suppression. I’ve told you why it’s not, your choosing to believe only one group of people can’t seem to follow the voting laws and I’m stating they are very well capable of doing so. Why is that hard for you to understand unless you have a desire for grievance politics?

I will certainly listen and take into account what the ex-Secretary of Homeland Security has to say on the subject. Even more eye opening when he agrees his own party has a de facto open boarders stance.

Nice emoji again. Glad you can contribute in that way! Ya. Kinda just posted that Jeh Johnson agrees with my assessment.

Maybe take Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security’s word for it. Is he qualified to answer? Would you like to ask him for proof? https://www.businessinsider.com/obamas-dhs-chief-says-democratic-candidates-embracing-open-borders-2019-7?op=1 Obama's homeland security secretary says 2020 Democrats' immigration proposals are practically 'open borders' Jeh Johnson, the secretary of homeland security during President Barack Obama's second term, told The Washington Post on Tuesday that some 2020 Democrats were pushing border-security reforms that might be ineffective and outside the immigration policies that most Americans want. Read more: Julián Castro is running for president in 2020. Here's everything we know about the candidate and how he stacks up against the competition. "That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders," Johnson said of the push to decriminalize border crossings. "That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that."

If you don’t send back the apprehensions and just catch and release, it’s a de facto open boarder. The immigrants know this, you understand this, and the Democrats know this. Go back and watch clips of the Democratic debates.

So to recap: Its voter suppression to have everyone play by the same voting laws, laws that if challenged and deemed illegal by a court would then be struck down by a court and be mute at that point. However, If challenged and not deemed illegal, everyone would be following the same valid law. Everyone who is eligible to vote would still be eligible to vote and have plenty of time to get prepared to vote. If someone decides not to abide by the voting laws or not vote altogether, then it’s suppression? When those people in question have opportunity and time to follow the rules set forth of the state they reside in and that many times those new laws go through court scrutiny, that’s suppression? I will go ahead and go on record and disagree.

Probably because you interjected yourself into that conversation Market is green, I’m well. Thanks for caring so much.

So it’s a no answer. Ok.

Feel free to give your input to the question posed instead of an emoji.

What percent are being detained and sent back vs detained and let loose till a “hearing” date?

Seeing as how it’s worse than any point in the last 20 years, it seems to be the case.

I’ll give you the chance to answer the same question I gave to Guy.

Correct. This might be different in CA, but elsewhere Republicans have to abide by the same voting standards as any democrat. so I’m clear, you don’t believe Black voters are able to get a voter ID sometime in the next 3 1/2 years and then mark out some time during the 2-4 week (sometimes longer depending on the state) early voting period for the next Presidential election to vote in an election that is important to them? Same question can be asked of any demographic but you brought up Black voters so that’s my ask.

The entire Democrat primary was commercial for open boarders with an invitation to come and stay no questions asked (except maybe what state do you want to live in).