Lil' Red

That chart is awful. There's no reason to include % for both approve and disapprove unless you really care about the 3rd group (indifferent) and nobody cares about their %.

I care about it. If approval is at 50%, it makes a big difference whether disapproval is at 50% or 30%.

 

For how long, and after how many lives ruined, do we no longer have to keep giving Trump a chance?

Ya shame on Trump for fixing the city of Chicago of its violence death disease ridden city it has been past 8 years where Chicago native ex President Obama ignored it....

 

How dare that Trump

 

Shouldn't we wait until we actually see some improvement before we praise Trump for fixing Chicago?

On Flynn

"I don't think he did anything wrong. If anything, he did something right."

On why Flynn was fired

"The thing is he didn't tell our Vice President properly and then he said he didn't remember... that just wasn't acceptable to me."

Why is it so hard to become a legal American citizen?

 

My ex wife has a friend that dated and married and illegal Hispanic but did go through the process to become an American citizen but I'm not sure how long that process took.

It's a much harder process for individuals that aren't married to an American citizen. I know someone from New Zealand going to school here that concluded his only shot at American citizenship was through marriage because of how slim his chances were in the green card lottery system.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. However, I haven't seen many accusations of Trump being anti-semitic. I think those are mostly directed at Bannon.

Any positive qualities about American culture in any way, shape or form chimichanga?

• Football

 

Where are these paid protesters?

I'm looking for some extra cash

Yeah, I'd like to get in on this deal.

 

 

AZRaider, I'd argument that kids and families shouldn't be forced to assimilate if they choose not to. BRB kind of hit on it a little bit. Sure, they should probably learn English because it's going to be very hard to be functional in society here without doing so, but beyond that, I'm all for them being as culturally Mexican as they want (or any other immigrant, for that matter). The town I lived in back in Iowa had a large Hispanic population. A lot of my friends still had families that were largely not assimilated. A lot of their parents worked at the Farmland plant in our town. Heck, I remember going out to a friend's house to hang out and seeing a giigantic side of beef on their counter. First time I'd ever seen one of those. But me, I loved their culture and being exposed to lots of different stuff. It shaped me into who I am today. That's just me and I get we're all different.

 

What are those other serious issues/challenges you refer to in regards to immigration? I'm curious to hear more about your perspective.

 

IMO, the wall is a stupid waste of money that serves very little functional purpose beyond placating a portion of Trump's base that believes it's going to magically stop every illegal and stifle the cartel. We've got plenty of other infrastructure that would actually provide value we could build/repair with that amount of cash.

 

Building a wall to address illegal immigration is idiotic if we're not going to try to fix the immigration system first.

Fair points dude. In terms of challenges with illegal immigration, I'd refer to the criminal element that is an aspect of our immigration issues. Here in the SW, we have big issues with people crossing our borders with the primary goal to commit crimes. However, I'm not sure that a giant wall is going to solve that problem. In fact, it will likely keep those individuals out that are trying to come to this country to work and provide for their families, while the "bad guys" will simply continue to circumvent the wall and build bigger and longer tunnels.

 

I actually look at the wall similar to if people want to ban guns.

 

If you build a wall, the bad guys will still get in.

If you ban guns, the bad guys will still get guns.

 

Neither of these issues are as simple as people want to make them.

 

Similar story with drugs. In fact, legalizing some drugs would do more to prevent bad guys getting in than a wall.

 

A part of me doesn't want Trump impeached. Pence is everything I don't want in a President on a different spectrum.

 

Pence is wrong within the normal parameters.

 

Plus, as an added benefit, for those who want to move on from this administration, Pence would be much more predictable in office and have a much harder time appealing to disaffected moderates. The disaffected largely went to Trump because they felt no one else cared about them and he represented an opportunity to blow up the system that had forgotten them. He openly called for their vote to go shake things up.

 

Pence doesn't have that quality. If he goes full blown social conservative and starts churning out religious freedom laws, the same thing will happen that happened in Indiana. People would feel discriminated against, it will hurt the economy, his popularity will sink, and you can tie those as an electoral anchor around his neck.

 

You can also undo the damage of a Pence a lot easier than an economic collapse or huge foreign policy blunders Trump could create.

 

I agree. My main concern with Pence is that the public will be so relieved about having a president that is wrong within the normal parameters that they will not be as energized to fight his more insane policies as hard as they do with Trump. I think he'd still be a definite upgrade though.

 

 

 

 

 

Okay, here goes:

 

NOTE: I should have initially qualified what I said here to mean members of Congress, both the House and Senate.

 

The Republican Utopia

​​​* "Dangerous" non-whites are completely removed from America.

Black people are exterminated out-right.

​Brown people are killed and/or rounded up and shipped back to their country of origin.

* Non-christians are either forced to convert or are jailed or killed.

* People who are gay, transgender, queer, non-binary, etc are forced to become straight or are killed.

* No minimum wage. It'll be completely up to corporations and companies what to pay their employees.

* No ethics committees to oversee them and make it impossible to get any information on what they do.

* Remove all regulations governing safety of employees, abolish vacation time, over-time pay.

* Legalize discrimination against anyone non-white and non-Christian and call it "religious freedom."

* Deny people of non-Christian faiths the right to practice their religion. (Mostly this refers to Islam.)

* Abolish science as a subject taught in schools and completely forbid teaching evolution.

* Make studying the bible, praying in public schools, and teaching creationism a part of the core learning.

* Outlaw protests against them and make obtaining permits for any protest nearly impossible to get.

* Revoke citizenship or jail anyone who burns the American flag.

 

I'm sure there are more, but those are what I can think of, off the top of my head because those subjects have all come up recently.

Well...I'm conservative and at one time was a Republican. I believe the Republican party has lost it's way and isn't something I can vote for.

 

But...your post is out in la la land on the subject.

 

This would be akin to me claiming Obama is Muslim and wants install Sharia law in the US and Democrats have been planning this for 40 years when they first brought him from Kenya as a child prodigy to ultimately destroy America.

 

 

Except, there are stories from CNN and other sites where Republicans are actually talking about doing many of the things I mentioned.

 

 

 

Legalizing religious based discrimination: https://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/17/senate-republicans-zeroing-religious-freedom-bills/

 

Burn the American flag, go to jail: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/29/politics/donald-trump-flag-burning-penalty-proposal/index.html

 

 

 

 

So you are for the first amendment ..but not really?

 

The first article is pro-14th amendment and the second is pro-1st amendment. I don't see your point.

 

I guess I see the texas tribune article and the cnn piece both as 1st amendment issues. How is it a 14th issue?

 

The article is about laws that would grant individuals the right to discriminate against individuals in the LBGTQIA community. The 14th amendment prohibits states from passing laws that allow for targeted discrimination and was used by SCOTUS to declare bans on gay marriage unconstitutional.

 

 

 

Okay, here goes:

 

NOTE: I should have initially qualified what I said here to mean members of Congress, both the House and Senate.

 

The Republican Utopia

​​​* "Dangerous" non-whites are completely removed from America.

Black people are exterminated out-right.

​Brown people are killed and/or rounded up and shipped back to their country of origin.

* Non-christians are either forced to convert or are jailed or killed.

* People who are gay, transgender, queer, non-binary, etc are forced to become straight or are killed.

* No minimum wage. It'll be completely up to corporations and companies what to pay their employees.

* No ethics committees to oversee them and make it impossible to get any information on what they do.

* Remove all regulations governing safety of employees, abolish vacation time, over-time pay.

* Legalize discrimination against anyone non-white and non-Christian and call it "religious freedom."

* Deny people of non-Christian faiths the right to practice their religion. (Mostly this refers to Islam.)

* Abolish science as a subject taught in schools and completely forbid teaching evolution.

* Make studying the bible, praying in public schools, and teaching creationism a part of the core learning.

* Outlaw protests against them and make obtaining permits for any protest nearly impossible to get.

* Revoke citizenship or jail anyone who burns the American flag.

 

I'm sure there are more, but those are what I can think of, off the top of my head because those subjects have all come up recently.

Well...I'm conservative and at one time was a Republican. I believe the Republican party has lost it's way and isn't something I can vote for.

 

But...your post is out in la la land on the subject.

 

This would be akin to me claiming Obama is Muslim and wants install Sharia law in the US and Democrats have been planning this for 40 years when they first brought him from Kenya as a child prodigy to ultimately destroy America.

 

 

Except, there are stories from CNN and other sites where Republicans are actually talking about doing many of the things I mentioned.

 

 

 

Legalizing religious based discrimination: https://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/17/senate-republicans-zeroing-religious-freedom-bills/

 

Burn the American flag, go to jail: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/29/politics/donald-trump-flag-burning-penalty-proposal/index.html

 

 

 

 

So you are for the first amendment ..but not really?

 

The first article is pro-14th amendment and the second is pro-1st amendment. I don't see your point.

Moraine said: The bolded reminds me of how some talk about Muslims. People shouldn't generalize. I have trouble understanding how people can vote Republican considering their anti-gay policies, but I know Republicans who aren't anti-gay. To many of them, when you weigh "killing babies" vs discrimination, the former outweighs the latter so they go ahead and vote Republican.

 

​The bolded part...unfortunately that is true.

 

However, if there is one subject that most Republicans, most Muslims, and in fact most of society can all agree on, is that being gay, trans, queer, etc is reprehensible and anyone who is LBGTQIA should be, at the minimum, discriminated against. They hold the view that we do not belong in society and as such, any action they take against us, no matter how extreme, is always justifiable through religious beliefs.

 

The irony is, religious republicans, for all their anti-Muslim rhetoric, are far closer aligned to Islamic militants in ideology than they are what the Republican party was founded on: freedom, prosperity, adherence to the Constitution, limited government, etc.

 

And not to stray too far from the point: too many Republicans (both elected and rank and file) have an agenda that very closely has goals exactly what I have bullet pointed above.

 

And while I am catching flack (?deserved?) for what I say for being so general, all I can do is ask you (and everyone else) one question...

 

What's worse, the 1 Republican who openly espouses the extremist bullet points I listed earlier, or the 10 Republicans who sit by idly and do nothing even if they disagree?

My question is, what are you hoping to accomplish with these broad-brushed accusations? If your goal is to advance LBGTQIA rights, you are only hurting your cause by vilifying all Republicans regardless of their views on LBGTQIA rights. You are promoting the same us vs them mentality that is largely responsible for the discrimination that you are fighting against.

 

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/immigration/article131227599.html

 

This disturbing fact follows ICEs admission that, of the 36,007 criminal aliens it released from ICE custody in Fiscal Year 2013, 1,000 have been re-convicted of additional crimes in the short time since their release, according to the letter, dated June 12, 2015.

 

 

The Senate Judiciary Committee letter revealed that 121 immigrant convicts were charged with homicide following their release from ICE custody between 2010 and 2014. It also noted that in 2014, ICE released 2,457 immigrant convicts because of the Supreme Court ruling prohibiting detention of deportable foreign nationals beyond six months.

 

The Senate Judiciary Committee letter - PDF: http://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article131327329.ece/binary/ICE_Letter.pdf

 

But in response to the letter, Sarah Saldaña, then-director of ICE, stated that 33 of the 121 immigrant convicts accused of homicide-related offenses had been released on bond at the discretion of immigration courts. Another 24 were released because ICE was unable to obtain approval to deport them to their countries within the 180-day deadline set by the Supreme Court in 2001.

Of course none of that info justifies an immigration ban, but to say no crimes or murders have come at the hands of immigrants is just not true.

 

The quote was specific to refugees.

 

Trump is a champion for those who are either happy or indifferent to inflicting this hurt upon others. They know it's indefensible in civil argument. Fortunately, POTUS is now their protector and their hero.

 

An unfortunate state of affairs, to say the least.

Sometimes we need to put the security of this nation before other countries. I lock my doors at night not because I hate everyone outside of my house but because I love the people in my house.

 

Guaranteed had Obama gone through executing this 90 day ban on the 7 countries HE had addressed as having terroristic ties 2 years ago, people would be praising him. But no since it's Trump, he's a psycho, bigot, racist, ex.....

 

Have you considered that this ban might make us less safe? ISIS is reportedly celebrating the "blessed ban" because it helps further their narrative that we are at war with Islam and it also shows that their terrorist attacks are making us afraid which could help bolster their recruitment. Given that individuals from these countries have killed zero people on US soil over the past 30 years, I don't think diminishing the negligible risk of attacks from these countries is worth empowering ISIS.

Travel ban suspension upheld by US Appeals Court

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/09/appeals-court-to-issue-decision-on-trump-travel-ban-later-today.html

I think this pretty much means the ban in its current form is dead. With the Supreme Court the way it is, I think the best Trump could hope for is a 4-4 ruling which leaves this ruling in place.