Trump: U.S. Will Pay For Wall

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Hypothetical one.
Wall gets built, but doesn't stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border.
Which causes the right to blame the left for not allowing more harsh laws that """stop""" illegal immigration.
The left then responds with, well your BBW was supposed to stop illegal immigration.
Nothing changes.

Hypothetical two.
Imaginary Wall doesn't get built, illegal immigrants continue to cross the border with no problems.
The right makes up some excuse as to why it's the left's fault the imaginary BBW wasn't built.
The left says, see Trump lied! no Wall... Clinton 2020! Anti-Trump memes galore.
The right says, the BBW was always imaginary. Clinton is a liar! Lock her up! Trump 2020. Anti-Clinton memes galore.


Hypothetical three.
Wall doesn't get built, illegal immigrants continue to cross the border with no issues.
The right blames the left, the left blames the right.
Government threatens to shut down again.... again... again... and again...
Race in this country continues to play a main role in how people view one another.
South Park makes a series of episodes that are spot on.
The left again rigs the primary's. Then wonders why Trump is in for 8 years instead of 4.
 
Trump voters DGAF if he keeps his promises. They voted for him out of spite. The fact he won is good enough
 
honkicracker said:
Hypothetical one.
Wall gets built, but doesn't stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border.
Which causes the right to blame the left for not allowing more harsh laws that """stop""" illegal immigration.
The left then responds with, well your BBW was supposed to stop illegal immigration.
Nothing changes.

Hypothetical two.
Imaginary Wall doesn't get built, illegal immigrants continue to cross the border with no problems.
The right makes up some excuse as to why it's the left's fault the imaginary BBW wasn't built.
The left says, see Trump lied! no Wall... Clinton 2020! Anti-Trump memes galore.
The right says, the BBW was always imaginary. Clinton is a liar! Lock her up! Trump 2020. Anti-Clinton memes galore.


Hypothetical three.
Wall doesn't get built, illegal immigrants continue to cross the border with no issues.
The right blames the left, the left blames the right.
Government threatens to shut down again.... again... again... and again...
Race in this country continues to play a main role in how people view one another.
South Park makes a series of episodes that are spot on.
The left again rigs the primary's. Then wonders why Trump is in for 8 years instead of 4.
Click to expand...
Three. The rigs part.

Nothing "democratic" about that party until it loses.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
It was very difficult to find a roofing company in Portland that would put in writing that they don't employ illegals. As a consumer you have to take some personal responsibility for the illegal problem in this country. Real Americans don't wait for the government to solve all their problems.
Click to expand...
Lol i know of one. Ask me next time dog!
 
honkicracker said:
Hypothetical one.
Wall gets built, but doesn't stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border.
Which causes the right to blame the left for not allowing more harsh laws that """stop""" illegal immigration.
The left then responds with, well your BBW was supposed to stop illegal immigration.
Nothing changes.

Hypothetical two.
Imaginary Wall doesn't get built, illegal immigrants continue to cross the border with no problems.
The right makes up some excuse as to why it's the left's fault the imaginary BBW wasn't built.
The left says, see Trump lied! no Wall... Clinton 2020! Anti-Trump memes galore.
The right says, the BBW was always imaginary. Clinton is a liar! Lock her up! Trump 2020. Anti-Clinton memes galore.


Hypothetical three.
Wall doesn't get built, illegal immigrants continue to cross the border with no issues.
The right blames the left, the left blames the right.
Government threatens to shut down again.... again... again... and again...
Race in this country continues to play a main role in how people view one another.
South Park makes a series of episodes that are spot on.
The left again rigs the primary's. Then wonders why Trump is in for 8 years instead of 4.
Click to expand...
I think a major part of the problem is terms like "the left" and "the right". These are artificial clumpings that are practically meaningless. If "the left" means anything, it's Sanders' supporters who had nothing to do with "rigging" the primaries. (If there was a "rigging" here it was a party political thing: the Democrats wanted an actual Democrat to win, not somebody who called himself a Democrat the day before he started running and then dropped that nomenclature the moment he dropped out. Ironically, of course, the Repubs tried desperately to do the same but Trump won anyway.)

This whole "left/right" thing obscures the diversity of views across the political spectrum that might be a way to unlock gridlock which is what the people who give Congress a lower approval rating than botulism (and then turn around and vote for Tea Partiers who make it worse) are complaining about. Social conservatives have very little in common with Libertarians but they're clumped together under Repubs. Despite the fact that there are anti-abortion Democrats (including Harry frickin' Reid) and Repubs (including Donald frickin' Trump) who don't give a shit about the culture wars. But, of course, they have to pretend to to keep the coalition going, adding to the cycle of cynicism.
 
Denny Crane said:
Three. The rigs part.

Nothing "democratic" about that party until it loses.
Click to expand...
Serious question, Denny: you have managed to work yourself into a froth about the Wikileaks revelations. Do you honestly believe that the Repubs are any different? Or is your position "I will assume the best until I am forced to believe otherwise by (obviously politically motivated) leaks?"
Essentially your position is "Democrats bad because leaks show bad, Repubs good because no leaks".
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Serious question, Denny: you have managed to work yourself into a froth about the Wikileaks revelations. Do you honestly believe that the Repubs are any different? Or is your position "I will assume the best until I am forced to believe otherwise by (obviously politically motivated) leaks?"
Essentially your position is "Democrats bad because leaks show bad, Repubs good because no leaks".
Click to expand...

I believe any republican emails would show they tried to keep Trump from winning. It was done in the open, though. Like Romney's speech. Leaking them would have only helped Trump by gaining him even more of the sympathy that helped him win.

I'm not a republican or fan of them. Of the bunch who ran, I'd have preferred Kasich. Cruz was just awful, but still would have beaten Clinton (any one of them would).

The republicans do not have super delegates. I don't know how anyone can honestly support that concept, though people blindly do. It's unelected delegates choosing on behalf of the party, not on behalf of the people. It was mostly these unelected delegates that threw the delegate count against Sanders. That much of the rig job was done out in the open, but buried by the media.

I think both parties ruin big parts of the country and society. Republicans maybe slightly less. I'd be a lot happier if they lived up to their rhetoric about smaller government and fiscal responsibility, but last time they had control of all 3 branches like this, they spent like there was no end to the money.
 
Denny Crane said:
I believe any republican emails would show they tried to keep Trump from winning. It was done in the open, though.
Click to expand...

Okay, what about stuff like phony voter registration laws that are designed to suppress the minority vote? Would you believe leaks that showed that this was intentional on the Republican part? Would you be outraged? Or is suppressing minority vote okay, but trying to stop Bernie unconscionable?

Also: why are you so outraged about Bernie (supposedly) being denied the Democratic nomination when his policies are about as anti-libertarian as you can get? (Although, judging by your approval of the VA and the Post Office, I don't think you really mean by "libertarian" what everyone else does.)
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Okay, what about stuff like phony voter registration laws that are designed to suppress the minority vote? Would you believe leaks that showed that this was intentional on the Republican part? Would you be outraged? Or is suppressing minority vote okay, but trying to stop Bernie unconscionable?

Also: why are you so outraged about Bernie (supposedly) being denied the Democratic nomination when his policies are about as anti-libertarian as you can get? (Although, judging by your approval of the VA and the Post Office, I don't think you really mean by "libertarian" what everyone else does.)
Click to expand...

I don't think that's as black/white is it's made out to be in the press. One one hand, citizenship does come with the privilege of the vote, and not everyone who lives here is a citizen. On the other, the privilege to vote should not be unduly impeded. Either POV is perfectly valid, regardless of the crap spewed by democrats.

I don't think there's any kind of smoking gun along those lines.

FWIW, I opposed any sort of laws that restricted the vote and applaud the courts for striking them down when they did.

And I do think you have little understanding of what Libertarian means.

As a Libertarian, I favor the maximization of individual liberty over what has become unelected government panels deciding for everyone. The Constitution, literally interpreted, is Libertarian. The Post Office is called for in the Constitution. The VA is indirectly detailed in the form of raising a military and paying our national debts (we owe the soldiers, per contract). The proposal I make on health care is not socialist, costs the taxpayer $0, does not require anyone to participate, and only fosters competition - competition will drive innovation and lower costs in all things.

I'm not a conservative. I am not religious (can't stand religion, actually). I am pro choice, pro civil rights, pro woman, for free and open borders, for legalization of drugs, etc. You will find MarAzul and other traditional conservatives and I have disagreed on many things in many threads here over the years.

But feel free to invent a definition of Libertarianism and claim I don't fit it.

EDIT: I also favor economic freedom and true free markets. Like I said, competition drives innovation and lower costs. I don't mean regulated capitalism, I mean pure capitalism, which was only tried here for a brief time and worked perfectly well.

Capitalism is another straw man used by the left, argued as a bogeyman. If pure capitalism (separation of economy and state) were practiced, we wouldn't see the ills of capitalism mixed with government (kleptocracy, plutocracy, corruption, etc.).
 
Last edited:
Denny Crane said:
The Constitution, literally interpreted, is Libertarian
Click to expand...
The Constitution Party is that party....the Libertarian Party is like the Blazers....lacks a core identity...personally, I vote for people I think reflect my sensibilities, not political parties.
 
riverman said:
The Constitution Party is that party....the Libertarian Party is like the Blazers....lacks a core identity...personally, I vote for people I think reflect my sensibilities, not political parties.
Click to expand...

For the most part, you could not tell any of the Libertarian Party candidates apart from one another over the years. They all share the same philosophy and take the very same positions on issues.

The constitution party is a christian nationalist party. The libertarian party has nothing to do with any religion or silly belief this is a judeo-christian nation.
 
Denny Crane said:
I'm not a republican or fan of them.
Click to expand...

Denny Crane said:
I'd be a lot happier if they lived up to their rhetoric about smaller government and fiscal responsibility
Click to expand...

Denny Crane said:
last time they had control of all 3 branches like this, they spent like there was no end to the money.
Click to expand...

Yep, yep. They just agree with me more often, err way more often than the Democrats.
I am now worried though, that we don't seem to have any real Democrats any more. Like the old Wayne Morris, Scoop Jackson, John Kennedy, Sam Nunn, Daniel Moynihan...
People that were Democrats not socialist or Commie pinkos. Too bad we don't have some now that the Pubs have both houses and the Executive.
Your point number three is wide open for repeat.
 
I dont care so much about a physical wall as i do deporting every non citizen who gets arrested.
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
I dont care so much about a physical wall as i do deporting every non citizen who gets arrested.
Click to expand...
California already leads in car chase tv coverage. Imagine the carnage on the freeway. This is why I prefer making them leave on their own. I don't know how people from far away countries will afford the trip but I'm leaning towards not caring.
 
MARIS61 said:
What part of "Mexico will pay us back" don't you understand? :dunno:
Click to expand...

You're really gonna fall for that line of bullshit? Both Mexican presidents have said they ain't payin'.
 
dviss1 said:
You're really gonna fall for that line of bullshit? Both Mexican presidents have said they ain't payin'.
Click to expand...

http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/23/f...rump-could-actually-make-mexico-pay-for-wall/

Former Mexican Diplomat: Trump Could Actually Make Mexico Pay For Wall

Mexico’s former Minister of Foreign Affairs warned Thursday that a President Donald Trump could actually get the country to pay for a wall.

“I think we should be serious about this,” Jorge Castaneda said at the Hudson Institute in comments first reported by The Weekly Standard. “If [Trump] really wants Mexicans to pay for the wall, he has many ways of getting many Mexicans to pay for the wall.”

Castaneda, who served as Foreign Minister of Mexico from 2000 to 2003, went on to criticize the proposal of a Mexican senator who wants to stop Mexican money from potentially going towards building a wall. “I like the Senator who proposed something, Armando Rios Piter’s,” he said. “He’s a nice guy, he’s a good friend, he’s an intelligent fellow, but this is not serious – proposal to forbid Mexican federal money from being used for paying the wall.”

The former diplomat said Trump could force Mexico to foot the bill for a border wall by increasing visa fees, which is a decision made by the State Department, not Congress. Or he could increase the toll on bridges through the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, or through taxing remittances. “There are ways of doing it,” he said, adding: “So that’s silly, Rios Piter’s thing, es una tonteria [Spanish for it’s silly].

 
Consider that Trump could levy a fee on all wire transfers to Mexico and checks on US banks cashed in Mexico.

It doesn't really matter what the Mexican president says.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top