Recount Opinions

With dissolving policy now when Cuban flee actually political oppression this clears the way for them to be deported back to Cuba.

Interesting to see what folks support.

I guess when it comes to immigration policy, my first question is should people follow our immigration policy to enter the country or do you support illegal immigration where people just cross into the country illegally as human traffickers, or with drugs, or with guns or as terrorist?

that's always my first question and I guess I shouldn't be surprised by the responses.
I support a very loose immigration policy, more in line with the Statue of Liberty's ideal, but the idea would be that we establish an enforceable policy and then enforce it.

Without a lot of specifics, ideally imo our immigration policy would be something like: if you can show a willingness to work, that you abide by the laws of your current nation, and have some verifiable plan to establish residency (ie live with relatives, or enough savings to support 1year of residency, etc); then you should be able to come in on a temporary visa, with an eye towards citizenship.

Yes it does. I'm SO happy to be paying for that too. Mexico will give us a giant ass middle finger when he says to pay for it. The part that pisses me off the most is that he actually thinks that will work. Maybe you said it, but use TECHNOLOGY if you're going to do anything at all. The idea of a fucking wall is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. His supporters are literally jizzing in their pants over it. Hope they're fine with their tax dollars covering it because Mexico sure as shit will never pay a dime on it. He'll eventually say, "Oh, well we taxed Mexico enough to pay for it." My ass.

You're right, a wall is ridiculous ... A fence is much more practical.

And for Obama, who voted for the border-fence bill back in 2006, the barrier may be best described as a big potential headache. Opponents are already appealing to him to halt construction and re-evaluate the project. But so far, the new Administration has given no indication that it is seriously considering doing so. While it has said it will make comprehensive immigration reform a priority, a spokesperson told TIME that Obama supports the fence "as long as it is one part of a larger strategy on border security that includes more boots on the ground and increased use of technology."

Opponents of the Texas-Mexico Border Fence Look to Obama - TIME (http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1872650,00.html)

Oh .... and just so you don't think Mr. Obama was the lone Democrat on this:

Taking her hardest line yet against illegal immigrants, Sen. Hillary Clinton told the Daily News she wants U.S. borders secured with a wall or fence, possibly surveillance drones and infrared cameras.

Clinton's proposal - which came just weeks after she blasted Republican crackdowns on illegal immigrants as un-Christian - raised the ire of activists.

But she tempered her remarks by saying that, while she supports a barrier to stem new illegal immigrants, she favors a legalization process for the 11 million undocumented aliens already here.

Hillary Clinton: Border needs wall (http://www.alipac.us/f9/hillary-clinton-border-needs-wall-21361-print/)
(citing to a no longer available NY Daily News article).

But, hey, these articles are from 2009, and 2006 respectively. Clearly, we shouldn't judge folks by their actions eight or ten years ago ... that's ancient history, right?

Dude really? Your lost, really no hope for ya if you understand what going on here. Step back, big picture.


My question was a pretty simple one,why can't you or won't you answer it?

again it was,"I am asking "if it's a" true accusation" whom would a Trump supporter " accept in "substantiating it"?They don't trust FBI,CIA and NSA so again who would you accept to "substantiate" it?

Dude really? Your lost, really no hope for ya if you understand what going on here. Step back, big picture.

Cubans react to end of 'wet foot, dry foot' policy - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/13/us/wet-foot-dry-foot-reaction/index.html)

big news, looks like we are putting up a wall, right?

To me wet foot dry foot was one of the most hypocritical if not racist bits of legislation we have had in recent times. We will accept Cuban asylum seekers that touch soil but not Haitian asylum seekers never mind their government is just as violent and oppressive. They should've called it "white foot, brown foot" that would be far more appropriate.

It's not hard to have Mexico pay a bill for it. If you understand toll roads, then you understand how to build something, and recoup the costs. Add a wall surcharge to every wire transfer to Mexico, an additional fee at each entry point, etc. Mexico currently has a huge trade surplus with us, there are simply ways recoup the costs of building a wall.

As for it being the most ridiculous idea ever, there are examples throughout the world of walls used in the manor described. It's not a horrid idea, and it's not a fantastic amazing solution. It's something Trump throughout that resonated with his supporters, and got his opponents panties all in a bunch. Once he saw that, it was a given he was going to make it happen. If the Democrats had responded more openly to some form of border control, then he likely would have dropped it. At this point it's going to happen, and if people want to traffic in illegal stuff (which they will) they will have to get more creative than timing border patrol shifts (which they will).

They already have. They're called tunnels, and they are one of the main avenues of bringing drugs/guns/human trafficking into the country. Quick, let's build an underground wall too!

You're right, a wall is ridiculous ... A fence is much more practical.



Opponents of the Texas-Mexico Border Fence Look to Obama - TIME (http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1872650,00.html)

Oh .... and just so you don't think Mr. Obama was the lone Democrat on this:



Hillary Clinton: Border needs wall (http://www.alipac.us/f9/hillary-clinton-border-needs-wall-21361-print/)
(citing to a no longer available NY Daily News article).

But, hey, these articles are from 2009, and 2006 respectively. Clearly, we shouldn't judge folks by their actions eight or ten years ago ... that's ancient history, right?

Those ideas are terrible, they came from Dems so they are quite useless! Trump's wall is gold plated and comes with imported marble from the Franciscan Church and Monastery. All he needs is a small loan of 50 billion dollars from the American people, but wait he's totally gonna pay it back and then some!

They already have. They're called tunnels, and they are one of the main avenues of bringing drugs/guns/human trafficking into the country. Quick, let's build an underground wall too!
As you build the wall I would expect them to include underground sensors. Its not like we don't know how to incorporate eavesdropping tech into government projects.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

My question was a pretty simple one,why can't you or won't you answer it?



again it was,"I am asking "if it's a" true accusation" whom would a Trump supporter " accept in "substantiating it"?They don't trust FBI,CIA and NSA so again who would you accept to "substantiate" it?



Give up man. He says whatever the fuck he feels like, and they build a truth around it. It's really that fucking sad and simple.
Luckily there are millions more of us than there are of them. [emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]
Let Donny play potus for a while. Hopefully he wont mess anything up that we cannot fix later.

Give up man. He says whatever the fuck he feels like, and they build a truth around it. It's really that fucking sad and simple.
Luckily there are millions more of us than there are of them. [emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]
Let Donny play potus for a while. Hopefully he wont mess anything up that we cannot fix later.

One of the most amazing things to me, is how often I think "that's exactly how I feel" when you or Matty are putting your thoughts down - of course with the names/parties changed. For example, I feel exactly the same way about Pres. Obama, he most definitely says BS and then his supporters build truth around it (albeit often with the help of a biased press corps). He, and the dems, had their time, now hopefully DT can come in and get the country back on track.

Editorial - With Trump 'bombshell,' fake news gains new life - Richmond Times-Dispatch: OUR OPINION (http://www.richmond.com/opinion/our-opinion/article_b17151f1-3db1-52f6-bd1c-b51a37939e6e.html)

great take here. Buzzfeed has been educating folks about fake news...of course this became an issue "only" after Hillary loss because we need to blame someone other than the candidate.

So Buzzfeed is upset with false, fake news, but then they turn around an publish fake news. Folks you cant make up this hypocrisy.

"Somebody has been shopping the document around for a while, but reputable news organizations did not report on it because, as New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet explained, its contents are "totally unsubstantiated.""


Looks like this "fake news" wasn't fake at all. The document came from one of the world's most renowned Russian spies in the intelligence field, and currently owns one of the most respected intelligence agencies in the world. His work also helped expose FIFA, which led to the FBI arrests.

Christopher Steele, Trump Dossier Author, Is a Real-Life James Bond - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/christopher-steele-trump-dossier-author-real-life-james-bond-n706376)

Nobody was "shopping" the document around. It had been passed around months prior, but nobody would run it since it was unverified. The part that bothers me the most is, the FBI had this document(via John McCain) well before the election and chose to go after Hillary and her emails when we might possibly have a Russian patsy in office? If Hillary had won the election and this shit had come out, I would guarantee you she would be investigated repeatedly the next 8 years, and possibly put up on impeachment articles for being a Russian spy.

There is some straight up legitimacy on this document. This kind of shit doesn't go into President and security council briefings for nothing.