Exactly. He had help.
[QUOTE=adaher;18648319
(Post edited)
But we can prevent a new 12 million from entering, and we can deport the most undesirable of that 12 million(the felons and recent border crossers).[/QUOTE]
12 Million more aren’t going to come. Birth rate in Mexico is now less than 2 per family. When there was 8 kids per family, they had to cross the border. Not now.
That means the end of cheap tomatoes and strawberries in the USA.
And Central America? That’s where the most recent wave came from.
Plus visa overstayers come from all over. And that’s the easiest thing in the world to enforce, because these people are documented. Going after visa overstayers is as simple as tax enforcement, something the government is actually motivated to do.
No, a simple answer delivered with conviction doesn’t have any value if it’s the wrong answer. Jenny McCarthy sincerely believes vaccination causes autism. That doesn’t mean we should make her the Surgeon General.
No fair quoting the imaginary liberals in your head. Show me an actual liberal who says we can end poverty by just giving people money. Most real liberals will tell you that poverty in a complex problem and we need to address it through a variety of programs like increasing the minimum wage, job creation, education, health care, public housing, public transportation, and tax reform.
No, because he panders to racism. That’s what his attacks on “political correctness” amount to.
That’s the worst example ever since it’s a simple issue. The anti-vaxxers are provably wrong. Whereas immigration policy is complex and every country is very different from every other country in how they handle it.
So my point stands. Current immigration rhetoric in the mainstream is aimed at confusion and deception. It’s complexity as an excuse for inaction. We see the same thing in foreign affairs. Any time we choose not to act, we plead complexity. And don’t get me wrong, foreign intervention is always complex. Complexity just isn’t a valid excuse for inaction. Inaction on any issue is a choice, and those that make that choice are 100% responsible for the results. Our government CHOOSES to allow high levels of illegal immigration. Now how to best reduce illegal immigration is a complex problem that will involve many solutions. But the first step is actually a simple one. Choose to actually enforce the law. Once you’ve done that, you can work on making the law work better.
Are you aware that Trump is an anti-vaxxer?
And as usual you forget that “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken
And even with that discretion Obama has deported more illegals than virtually any president from the past.
The notion that inaction is never the right course of action is preposterous.
Well, there was an attempt at reforming immigration last year:
So the President took Executive action. Because the Republicans wanted to save Immigration for the election year, to toss some red meat to their xenophobic base. Work with the President to adjust the system legally? That’s not sexy enough.
That’s not what I said. I said that inaction is usually excused by issues of complexity. But that’s not actually an excuse. Rwanda was complex. We’re still responsible for not taking action, as well as every other country that had the means but did nothing.
How should it be adjusted? If you listen to Democrats’ rhetoric, it would seem that the only problem with our immigration system is that we deport people.
There’s a big difference between inaction in domestic v. foreign affairs, for the simple reason that the U.S. is responsible for what happens in the U.S., but it’s not responsible for everything that happens around the world. If something’s clearly working badly here at home, the default assumption is that we should try to fix it. If something’s clearly fucked up in the Middle East, the default assumption is - or at least should be - that it’s Somebody Else’s Problem. In either case, these should be rebuttable presumptions, open to being disproved in particular cases, but that’s where we should start.
Man, you really do embody the ‘centrist’ journalistic wisdom these days! One of its recurring tropes is to insist of Obama, as a compromise between left and right, that he do something* that he’s already done*.
The net flow across our border with Mexico has dwindled to roughly zero. Obama has been more stringently enforcing the border than any of his predecessors, including George the Idiot. So that’s your first step.
Now, what’s the second step? 
(And FWIW, I don’t think anyone’s pleading complexity as an excuse for not dealing with immigration. Mostly what I hear from conservative immigration reform opponents (I acknowledge the redundancy) is that until Obama makes our border secure, they can’t trust him enough to deal with him. But that’s really an excuse; they just don’t want any immigration deal at all, just a wall.)
Oh, and I almost missed this.
No, anti-vaxxers are not “provably wrong”, they are totally wrong, erroneous, mistaken, unsound, untrue, counterfactual, defective, off-target, on the wrong track and out of commission.
A bullshitter like Trump should never be allowed to get a hold of the bully pulpit and order around offices like CDC that he will control if he becomes president.
My simple explanation -
Trump is the guy at the bar that everyone wants to fuck, 'cause he’s soooo cool.
Everyone else running want to us to get married to them.
The voters supporting him are so stupid they want to marry the guy they want to fuck. They are thinking with their crotches, rather than their heads.
The problem is not that Trump makes those promises, the problem is all politicians make versions of those promises, but they are mealy-mouthed about it when they do.
This problem stems from the larger problem of individuals in a supposedly free society looking to an all powerful executive of a leviathan state to calm their fears, make them prosperous, and stick it to the other guy for them. Bernie Sanders is running on the same impetus.
One F, a bunch of M’s, but no K’s?
I think I’ve just solved the Trump appeal riddle in my own mind: he’s the American Putin.
Delusional billionaire who blames everything on foreigners, and thinks he’s tougher than anyone else. American Putin.
Trump’s popular with the rabid GOP base because he’s blowing all the dogwhistles so hard they’re completely audible. The way to get ahead with racist, homophobic, misogynistic, anti-immigrant goblins is to be racist, homophobic, misogynistic and anti-immigrant (while quietly increasing your attempts to import ultra-low-wage immigrant labor for your hotels).
Astorain wrote: So… Republicans like Ben Carson because they’re racist?
Ironically enough, some of them do because it’s a way to show they’re not racist without actually having to elect him to anything.
This is nonsense. Republicans in the main are no more racist - and in some ways less so - than our Democrat opponents. The main qualifications for Republican support are conservative values and a conservative viewpoint. Clarence Thomas has them, Herman Cain has them, and Ben Carson has them, and they’ve all been welcomed heartily by Republicans all over the country. Naturally they’re excoriated by Dems and the black establishment as Toms or tokens, but that’s because it simply won’t do in their view for any blacks to be crossing to the dark side.
Even though Bill Cosby is in reality a big time liberal and always has been, I’ve long felt that the sex abuse accusations that have come his way and the media lynching that ensued have at least partially been the result of his very common sensical arguments about how black people should live, educate themselves and behave in ways that are condusive to getting ahead in the world and having happy, productive and stable home lives, all of which convinced many people he was conservative in his politics.
Look at the difference in how the nation’s liberals reacted to even the first few allegations agains Bill Cosby vs. the more serious allegations made against Bill Clinton, especially his physically overpowering, raping and injuring Juanita Broaddrick, who only came forward reluctantly after being coaxed into it after many years of silence. What Clinton is alleged to have done to her is many times worse than anything Cosby is claimed to have done, but when it comes to Clinton it’s shrug and “there’s no evidence”, but when it comes to Cosby even evidence to the contrary is ignored and he remains guilty until proven innocent.