One answer John gives (at Twitter) is:
The worst argument is he’s “NOT NORMAL,” “violates norms,” etc. That argument itself isn’t normal; “politics as usual” is an insult, not a compliment. WI, MI, & PA residents voted for him knowing he’s far from a normal politician and unlikely to change. They liked that about him.
Posts
339 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 339 of 339Sanders is not likeable.
He comes off as a crazy old coot.
"Elizabeth Warren does not have a good speaking voice.
She cannot overcome that.
She is a weak old lady. She cannot overcome that."
Warren is ruthless, she's mean and relentless, plus, she's a woman.
It will be up to ICE's discretion to pursue those cases, forcing them before an immigration judge.
I bet they will be their highest priority.
Once again, the devil is in the details and...failure.
well the ryan designed tax cuts, did let the residents of blue states, escape the irresponsibility of their local officials,
Documented or undocumented is not the entire argument
Inga level; thinking, if you could call it that.
"Undocumented" means they are here illegally. Snuck in breaking the law. The left is so stupid about this although I'm not sure they are as stupid as they pretend. Inga, why don't you step up and offer to pay for this medical treatment that is so crucial?
I spent 30 years providing treatment to ill or injured illegals, and all for free. My favorite was the guy who was hit by a train walking on the tracks with his SONY Walkman. He ended up getting 63 units of blood and I had to take out half his liver but we got him through.
He and his brother had a landscaping business so, when I saw him in the office postop, I suggested he could mow my lawn for a few months to repay me.
No, he said. He was "too busy."
Then he tried to sue Amtrak. The Amtrak lawyer and I had a good laugh.
He should have sued Sony.
Biden is getting the Harold Ford treatment. Entities in the Democrat party don’t want him. Warren has a wound as big as the Grand Canyon. Sanders is a “known entity”. He’s an awful candidate BUT he’s less awful than the others. Democrat elites believe a lot of stupid shit but primary voters are looking for electability and Sanders is next in line.
@ Michael K, in your eyes these sick children are as undeserving and ungrateful as your patient who was hit by a train by being careless? How have these children brought these illnesses upon themselves? You don’t see a difference?
Humanity, it eludes some folks.
Royal ass FrankIngaM thinks we must pay for others.
I welcome her to open her pocketbook.
Sanders is not and never has been a Democrat.
It will amuse the bejabbers out of me to see the Demmies go outside the party for their candidate.
It would be as unimaginable as the English choosing a German king or queen.
Or a native New Yorker and former American to be PM
Bernie can win a majority in every primary by huge margins and he still won't be the Demmy candidate
John Henry
Watching the Alabama game, and Tua Tagovailoa‘s father has on a ‘Tulsi’ ball cap. :)
So, Igna;
IF 1 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
IF 10 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
IF 100 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
At What Point, would YOU say; "Sorry, we're full" ??
Inquiring minds want to know.
Also, do you realize, that YOU was the best example of why people want to vote for Trump?
Inquiring minds want to know.
That his age could catch up with him and we might end up with a Biden problem?
Without the need to "win" again, i.e. reelection, he might lose the motivation to keep the base happy and just do whatever keeps him from feeling bored?
I dunno, but looking at the other side of the equation: let's say you hated Hillary in 2016 but also didn't love Trump enough to be enthusiastic about voting for him. Let's say you sat out or voted third party because Trump was comfortably ahead in the polls in your state. In 2020, your vote no longer applies only to your state's electors, but also to the electors in the 11 states that pledged their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. Might cause someone who isn't all that enthusiastic about Trump as a person to be much more motivated to vote for him, no?
Inga wrote:
"Most Americans have been listening, but what we hear is very different."
Most Americans are not angry, obsessive, and extremely stupid ideologues like you.
gilbar said...
So, Igna;
IF 1 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
IF 10 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
IF 100 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
At What Point, would YOU say; "Sorry, we're full" ??
Inquiring minds want to know"
The nitwit will never answer you. She doesn't permit such questions to enter her head.
in your eyes these sick children are as undeserving and ungrateful as your patient who was hit by a train by being careless?
Inga, I would have thought by now you would be on your way to pay the bills for those deserving children.
As usual, the left wants to make others pay for their "charity."
the best part is those comments are coming from a nurse.
She can give her time freely if she wanted to.
This is a rehash if the convo a few months ago,
Cares enuf to bash, not go to A detention center and help.
Your lack of humanity is showing.
Warren has her own set of problems. Primarily the low interest of black voters:
"...could matter a great deal when the contest turns to the South — beginning with South Carolina on February 29 — where in several states African-Americans are a majority of the Democratic-primary electorate"
I know the Godfather says not to get cocky, but this will be one of those elections where you struggle to remember who lost. Mondale? That Dukakis guy?
Replying to FrankiM in several posts around 3-3:30 pm who makes the point (at least as I interpret it, and in the context of this comment thread) that one way to convince undecideds to vote against Trump is to make the point clearly that Trump's immigration policies have treated illegal immigrants cruelly.
I really want to engage on this point because: (a) I think it is a good characterization of what Democrats believe; (b) it has a reasonably strong basis in fact; (c) it really is a constructive suggestion about how to convince people on the fence (unlike so many anti-Trump suggestions which amount to "you're a racist idiot, so vote for me".)
Here's how I want to engage on the subject: In my opinion a lot of people who either voted for Trump, or support Trump's immigration policies know/knew that they are/would be cruel to illegals. In fact, that is a feature, not a bug. The thinking behind this is something like: "We need to get control of our immigration numbers and greatly reduce -- perhaps eliminate is too far a reach-- illegal immigration. We are not opposed to immigration, but we want it done in an orderly way in which we -- the US -- controls the number and pace of immigration. Treating illegal immigrants with kindness, and allowing them to bring in family members once they are here, only encourages illegal immigration. It sends the message to people who are thinking about coming to the US illegally -- just get there and once you are there you will be allowed to stay more or less forever, and bring your families, and you'll be treated well and get medical care and food and legal assistance. This is the exactly wrong message which should be -- if you come to the US illegally and get caught, you will be in a huge amount of trouble -- you will be separated from your children, you will be kept in barely liveable circumstances, you will be deported and sent home."
So (back to FrankiM) the difficulty I see with your approach, is that a lot of convincible voters will want to ask any Democrat nominee, "what is your plan? Do you have a plan that will give us control over the borders and is less cruel than Trump's policy? Or do you just want to revert to the pre-Trump Obama policy that was less cruel but was ineffective in controlling borders?"
And so far, I don't see such a plan. I think there is an intellectual case to be made for open borders, and I think some Democrats (Castro?) are making that case. But I don't think "open borders" is a way to convince convincables to vote against Trump.
Zogby has Trump polling in the 20s head to head against all the Democratics.
With blacks.
And he has Trump within the margin of error.
With latinos.
Trump's negatives will not move; he is a known quantity.
All the Democratics' negatives will skyrocket.
Tell me again how Democrats have a path to victory.
The national debt and an unbalanced budget.
Limited Perspective:
Have you seen the budget proposals of Democratics?
Bernie has proposed $40T of new spending.
I think that argument loses steam fast.
Democrats cannot argue that they will increase people's prosperity more than under Trump; all of the things that all of the Democrat candidates want to do would wreck the economy to a greater or lesser degree. The people who believe that electing a Democrat is an existential necessity to "save the planet" are already on their side. Similarly, all the people who would expect to get "free stuff" paid for from the wealth of others are not undecided, either; they are all firmly in the Democrat column. Accusing anyone who would even think of voting for Trump of being some sort of terrible bigot is likely to backfire.
The only argument that might work for anyone who is truly still "undecided" is Trump fatigue: "Aren't you sick and tired of hearing the media's ceaseless clamor about the latest Trump outrage, (occasionally) true or (more likely) not? Well, if you help us defeat the Bad Orange Man and make him go away, then you won't have to hear those fools yammering on about him any more! Surely that's worth some people losing a lot of money and jobs, just for that peace of mind! Elect a Democrat and the media will return to its slumber like the eight halcyon years of Obama, like a drugged watchdog. Do it for your peace of mind!"
Can't think of any other argument that would work.
"The trigger wasn’t Trump’s China tariffs, but waivers the administration granted this month to 31 oil refineries so they don’t have to blend ethanol into their gasoline.” - AP
Even Al Gore admits that ethanol in gasoline has been an environmental disaster. But since Trump is rolling it back, it’s bad! Environmentalist have been waiting for years and years for the politician with the balls to do something about it.
Birkel makes a telling response to Limited perspective. But I do wonder whether Democrats can make a compelling case that "we are fiscally responsible, and we will achieve that responsibility by taxing the heck out of high income, or high wealth, individuals -- so it won't hurt you and it will be good for the economy and the country?" (I personally am not swayed by this argument, but I do see a plausible future in which it gains political traction.)
Last year the stories were about the extinction of prairie species due to the plowing of new fields for ethanol. Remember those? No, because the New York Times and Washington Post doesn’t want you thinking about those things!
the best part is those comments are coming from a nurse.
A self proclaimed psych nurse. Does anyone think that psych nurses are not infected with the lunacy seen in psychiatrists and psychologists?
I think Clyde makes an interesting point about "trump fatigue". I can think of two responses: (1) a lot of people (commenters here?) love watching and engaging in the on-line "you're an idiot" "No you're an idiot" repartee. (2) I sincerely do wonder if we haven't entered into an era in which "Trump fatigue" can only be replaced by "Sanders fatigue" or "Biden fatigue" or "Warren fatigue". I imagine that should (for example) a Democrat win the presidency and the Republicans hold the Senate, that there will be "Investigatory hearings on the new president" from day one. And if the option to avoid this "fatigue" is "Unified Democratic control of presidency/house/senate," I (personally) would rather have the fatigue.
Based on the news stories, I don’t think anybody fully understands what is going on with those foreigners (not immigrants) who are coming here for medical treatment, but it seems like Trump is taking his Oath of Office seriously, the part about enforcing the laws enacted by congress. Pelosi should change the law and fund the changes.
Anyway, they are not IMMIGRANTS, they are foreigners, or aliens. If you are sloppy in your language, you are sloppy in your thinking.
Joanne Jacobs and mockturtle agree on that, but I want to go a little farther. How will real black and Hispanic voters react to a whiter-than-white-bread university professor using alleged family lore to claim to be a POC? That will be an interesting question to see answered. I see at least some Democrat voters switching to Trump or sitting it out just on this issue.
Those black and Hispanic voters who appreciate the increased employment and higher paychecks will vote for Trump. Those who are only interested in the possibility of free stuff and reparations will vote Dem regardless of the candidate. Nothing to see here.
yes that's probably true:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/08/nbc-posts-major-correction-to-story-about-citizenship-for-military-families/
h asserts: I think there is an intellectual case to be made for open borders
I seriously doubt it but it might be interesting to hear. Just for laughs.
Most Americans have been listening, but what we hear is very different.
Stop having CNN/NBCABCMSNBCNYTWPLAT do your translating.
AURORA VISIBLE TONIGHT AROUND MIDNIGHT AS FAR SOUTH AS CHICAGO, CLEVELAND, and BOSTON... SET YOUR ALARMS.... THAT IS ALL.
mockturtle: We are here trying to think about ways that Democrats might convince "convinceables" that they should vote against Trump. FrankiM suggests that "Trump is cruel to illegals" is possible approach. My point was that if Democrats want to use this they need (in my opinion) an answer to the question: "If you don't want to be cruel, how are you going to deal with a policy that limits immigration?" One answer (kind of) is to say, "we will not limit immigration." I would respect Democrats who made that argument, and I do believe that an intellectual case can be made. But I do not believe that it is a case that would ever convince many people. So perhaps that's what you mean by "just for laughs".
Seeing Red said...
How can one argue we have rotten health care here and then argue we need to let people in to get the rotten health care?
Because theirs is worse?
They don't like the flavor of free ice cream on offer... And such small portions!
" I think there is an intellectual case to be made for open borders”
It doesn’t include free health care and minimum incomes to everybody who makes it here, I am guessing. Nor does it take into account the “climate impact” of moving millions of “climate saint” peasants into high consumption American lifestyles.
There is no consistent intellectual case to be made for open borders outside of "let ‘em starve if they can’t make it” libertarians.
"What argument against him do you think you'll find most persuasive?"
What argument in FAVOR of YOUR candidate do you think you'll find most persuasive. I give him credit for trolling the opposition to do his homework for him.
Teleprompter failure
https://pjmedia.com/trending/biden-undocumented-children-become-americans-before-a-lot-of-americans-become-americans/
Hey I'm white. And I like myself. But then I pretty much like everybody--with the exception of those people who have lied to me. And while I can think of a lot of politicians who have lied to me in one way or another, I can't think of a Latino or a black who's lied to me.
And I'm proud to be an American--with all of America's warts and flaws, on balance it's a pretty good place.
So if you call me a white nationalist, I'll say that you get a few points for accuracy, but danged little for the venom in your heart. f Any way, I doubt that a campaign to call me a white nationalist is going to get my vote next year---nor anybody else's.
The nitwit will never answer you. She doesn't permit such questions to enter her head.
It is interesting, that Igna NEVER responds; she swoops in drops her cut&pastes, then reloads
Igna, why IS IT that you don't respond? I take it independent thought is beyond you?
Maybe you just don't understand english?
क्या मुझे आपसे हिंदी में पूछना चाहिए?
The question is phrased wrong because the thinking behind it is wrong: people want to hear solutions to problems they face in their lives, not reasons to be against someone or something. It’s basic psychology.
Since I did say " I think there is an intellectual case to be made for open borders” I think I need to respond to some commenters. I personally do not favor open borders, so I admit I am not the best person to make the case for open borders. But I think it might go something like this:
1. We need open borders because immigrants strengthen our economy.
2. (kind of related to point 1) we need open borders because our native birth rate is so low and we need young people in the economy to pay our social security, etc.
3. We need open borders because we have no way of controlling our borders and all attempts at control are very expensive; or
4. We need open borders because the only way to reach an equilibrium is to have so many immigrants from poor countries that wage rates in the US converge to wage rates in these poor countries.
Before you reply to tell me why I'm "wrong" notice that these arguments could all be wrong, and still be used to convince people to vote against Trump.
replying to Skeptical voter. I agree with everything you've said, and I've (provisionally) decided to vote for Trump no matter what, because I sick and tired of anti-Trump people calling me racist.
The best argument *against* Trump is an argument *for* another candidate. It's pretty telling that Wikler isn't making any points in favor of the current frontrunners.
"Try to imagine yourself into the shoes of someone undecided on whether to support Trump in 2020.
Are those shoes work boots ... or Birkenstocks ??
The family came to the U.S. legally in 2016 and applied for "medical deferred action," a program that allows immigrants to receive life-saving treatment for up to two years. But, this week they received a denial notice, giving them 30 days to leave the country or face deportation.
Inga, you are going to have to locate some more particulars to convince me. If these people came legally in 2016 seeking treatment, they are beyond the 2 year limit and are not eligible for the program. If they came legally in 2016 and are no longer here legally they need to have left when no longer legal. If they were here illegally and now claim to be dying and need lifesaving treatment they would get it at the emergency room. Show me their two year treatment plan from the doc and you may convince me. Otherwise I assume this is just a last minute scam to claim imminent death to avoid the deportation of a whole family.
It doesn’t include free health care and minimum incomes to everybody who makes it here,
California, back when it was sane, tried that with Prop 187, which got 63% of the vote and even majorities in Hispanic districts.
The day after Proposition 187 was approved by the state's voters, several groups filed federal lawsuits against it, including the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and the ACLU. Three days after Proposition 187 was approved, on November 11, federal district court judge Matthew Byrne issued a temporary injunction against the state of California, forbidding the enforcement of Prop 187. Federal judge Marianna Pfaelzer then issued a permanent injunction, pending a trial.
Jerry Brown was AG and never appealed it.
We need open borders because the only way to reach an equilibrium is to have so many immigrants from poor countries that wage rates in the US converge to wage rates in these poor countries.
Explain that argument to blacks and legal Hispanics.
Time to get rid of Don the con end the tweets of classified photos, the beautiful letters from Kim announcing yet another test of rockets, the revolving door of corrupt and incompetent officials.
Open borders for the US is an inherently immoral position. Open borders allows the monied class and the folks close enough to walk an opportunity to be richer but denies opportunity to the poor or distant. We need a system where the people of the failed world to apply to the US for a slot to come here, then the DNC can sponsor a charity to buy them tickets. Continue until the whole third world lives here, then I can move to an empty South Africa.
Regarding two spaces after a sentence, it were good for yer fathers and it’s good enough for you.
The irony of the dancing on Koch's grave we have seen from the Democrats is that if he had one pet issue it was ... open borders. Open borders is a Koch brothers libertarian policy and has been for decades.
Deplorable? 2020 offers new hope!
Immigration benefits the wealthy and hurts the poor. The Democrats are the party of the hyper wealthy. It’s not that hard.
TCM is showing right now that classic starring Kirk Douglas with that iconic scene where they are looking for him and everyone stands up and says, "I'm Cory Booker." And another, "I'm Cory Booker." And another.
Understand there are millions of shoes with different wearers.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1167485529040007168.html
Few of them Swedish, those punks. At least they will be erased from history in a few generations, and I won't ever have to think about dirty Scandi's anymore.
No one believes an argument for open borders is going to win over an undecided voter. What I am asking undecideds to consider is this, do you want a president who’s policies are inhumane to fellow human beings? Especially children, sick children and the families of sick children. Do you want to align yourself with this sort of thing?
do you want a president who’s policies are inhumane to fellow human beings?
I for one would never vote for anyone who supports chopping up innocent human beings. And yet that is what the entire Democrat Party and every one of its candidates is enthusiastically in favor of.
Most Americans have been listening, but what we hear is very different.
You're listening to yourselves yammer on every TV, Radio, and online network there is. You're listening to yourselves and you're listening to Trump. But you're not listening to other Americans who have a different view of things than you. In fact, not only do you not listen to us, you make our speech and our thoughts illegal- in the schools, on Twitter, on Facebook, on You Tube, on Google search. You seek us out at our homes and protest our families if we don't have pure thoughts. You work to get us thrown out of our jobs if we don't follow the Groupthink. You refuse to respect us or any belief we have, but you demand that we submit to your ever-changing rules of life as Woke People.
Most of us don't want to play this game. We're the ones that come out on election day.
http://everynoise.com is the real 42.
The Party of Slavery, Secession, Segregation, and Slaughter has a lot to answer for.
They are showing a documentary on PBS now about Reconstruction. One thing that should have been done back then was to outlaw the Democrat Party forever, like Germany did with the National Socialists.
‘I for one would never vote for anyone who supports chopping up innocent human beings. And yet that is what the entire Democrat Party and every one of its candidates is enthusiastically in favor of.’
Yet, already born children are callously treated by those who care so much for the unborn. These sick children are as innocent and blameless as the unborn baby.
"These sick children are as innocent and blameless as the unborn baby.”
Pelosi should get to work on changing the law providing for access to our world’s best health care to foreigners then, instead of us demanding that the president somehow know which laws are “law laws” and which are just “laws” that can be ignored by a person sworn to uphold them.
I don’t think this blog is the place to ask this question. Too many true believers and too few independents, let alone independents who will speak up. And it probably less about voters switching sides and more about voters who stay home.
Finally Trump supporters may have already forgotten those folks in 2016 who knew they couldn’t speak of their interest in Trump. A reverse phenomenon could develop (I.e. “I’m not going to speak of my Trump fatigue”)
OTOH if the Dems choose someone crazy then “lesser of two evils” will probably motivate such undecideds.
Now make the argument that I am morally required to pay for other people.
And show me how you emptied out your bank account to pay for them.
Hypocrite.
My guess is Trump would sign changes to the law that handled the problems of these children. However, I am not sure that any time anybody in the third world has a child with cystic fibrosis, that should be a guarantee for entry into the United States indefinitely.
Now I need to find something else to complain about.
I knew it wouldn't be long.
Why is it that when you open one of those pre-packaged salad mixes you get at the store, the lettuce lasts about a day before turning brown and wilted? Even when I get the smallest package, it results in a lot of waste.
Franki seems to think that Trump is some kind of absolute ruler who makes our laws by decree. Probably because that’s what Obama thought when he was POTUS.
Phil 3:14
You're a NeverTrump guy but not a jerk; you've got that working for you.
So now tell me which Trump policies you believe Democratics will reverse for the better.
And you'll forgive us if we don't pay much attention to the moralizing of one of the most morally obtuse people to ever comment here, whether she is the original or just a cheap impersonator.
I'll spot you "free trade" that has hollowed out American manufacturing but made tons of money for multinationals.
Seeing Red said...
the best part is those comments are coming from a nurse.
She can give her time freely if she wanted to.
8/31/19, 5:17 PM
Exactly. The dolt spends all her time here virtue-signaling instead of actually helping the people she pretends to care about.
Mind you, that's probably all for the best. I wouldn't trust Inga to change a band aid properly.
One of the most just things we can do with those persons who callously abandon their fellow countrymen to poor conditions is to insist that they return home to fix their own countries. Or, if they are unable to, then to insist that the international community (UN, OAS, etc.) intervene militarily and restore some sense of humanitarian order in those countries that they are leaving behind.
I’d say 90% of posts can at least use some second hand smoke from some space weed.
Maybe planet Venus. Hugs are $50 dollars in New York !
Not Normal ? Put a 70 year young individual inside a blender for at least 4 years...
99% of the posts have managed to elude smack talking Trump, because he’s actually not that bad.
Outside of Lawyers, Accountants and Doctors, be wary of death by a business man.
Popular Vote said; death by Hillary is preferred but business as usual is actually apropos.
If business is not as usual, people may think that a change in the objective is a subjective death.
Then all retirees are the living dead. The only explanation.
Death is tricky, so is a diaper with poop. Diapers are expensive, death is free.
Business as usual is a lax term, more aggressive is preferred.
Giving internet to white supremacy in trailer parks, may or may not be armaggedon..
Not a morning person ? You’re doomed !
I wouldn’t vote for Trump or Obama, because they are golfers.
I'd just like to know who this undecided voter is. I don't think any Trump 2016 voters are undecided. He's appointed good justices, taken us out of bad treaties, encouraged manufacturing to return by lowering energy prices and taxes and cutting regulations, made us the biggest oil producer in the world, and taken on China's unfair trade practices. So it's a Dem who voted for Hillary? who thinks Trump is doing a good job and opposes socialism? There's no rational argument possible. Maybe you might want to use a vague ominous tone - say that cheating will be extensive, AnyDem will win and the Dems will know how you voted through the magic of Facebook analytics and Trump voters will all commit suicide by jumping to their death from three feet up - if they know what's good for them. But that might just convince the waverer that the worst is all true of all he is wondering about in relation to Hillary and the 4 Pinocchios of the media (NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC). I think the Dems are just a rerun of an earlier, better party and the Rerun-Dems going the way of the American Whig party - down the tubes, toast, over, finis, next season cancelled.
‘And you'll forgive us if we don't pay much attention to the moralizing of one of the most morally obtuse people to ever comment here, whether she is the original or just a cheap impersonator.’
I do forgive and excuse you as a Trumpist. You and your fellow Trumpists are not my concern. The subject matter is how can one make an argument that is most persuasive to make undecideds decide not to vote for Trump.
The only way to remove Trump is a coup d'etat based on false evidence...oh yeah that did not work. Next best way is a military coup under orders from the Joint Chiefs...oh yeah, Trump has the USMC on his side. Next best way is Air to ground missile to blow up Air Force One...oh yeah that has already been tried and did not work. Next best way is to call him a white supremacist racist 24/7...oh yeah nobody believes that whopper.
It's got to be Climate Crisis...and UN Armed Forces. Oh yeah Americans still own guns and ammunition. So maybe bribe him with Chinese loot? Oh yeah he doesn't need or take bribes.
Phoey!
Royal ass FrankIngaM wants to create a moral imperative for OPM.
Thatcher already answered that question.
Good luck with the socialism.
NYC is losing residents for their efforts.
There needs to be emigration reform to mitigate the progress of immigration reform and collateral damage at both ends of the bridge and throughout. The rate of immigration should not exceed the rate of assimilation and integration before planned parenthood.
Oh, and medical care should be affordable and available without redistributive change, before public and private smoothing functions, without bartering or authoritarian rule, and available without normalization of liberal license and dysfunctional orientations.
Birkel,
“You're a NeverTrump guy but not a jerk; you've got that working for you.
So now tell me which Trump policies you believe Democratics will reverse for the better.”
First of all I’m not a never Trumper. I didn’t vote for either candidate but I wouldn’t call myself a never Trumper.
As for the question you asked the answer is simple
“None”
I do forgive and excuse you as a Trumpist. You and your fellow Trumpists are not my concern.
See what a know-nothing you prove to be? I'm no Trumpist.
I am beginning to see the 2020 election as a redo of 2016 with Joe Biden as the likely candidate but as the guy “we should have nominated” and running essentially with the slogan of “I’m not crazy AND Obama liked me”
And like 2016 a close second will be Bernie (or maybe Warren) leaving the Socialist left feeling angry and convinced they’re oh so close. “If only...”
Blogger h said...
I agree with reasons 1-2. We need immigrants because 1)they strengthen our economy 2)Improve our low native birth rate
Disagree with 3. We can control our borders and while it is not free, the cost of controlling them is less than the cost of unlimited immigration.
I don't understand what you mean by 4 with equilibrium but it does not sound like a good thing.
We need immigration, it is what makes America America. New blood, new ideas, new cultures strengthen us.
But we do not need open borders to do this. We can have controlled, legal, immigration selecting who we let in and who we keep out.
I would let people from all over come in provided they can be self-supporting, are not sick and are not criminals/terrorists/troublemakers. In other words the same conditions we have now.
I think we can probably absorb about 1mm legal immigrants per year. I'm not married to that number, it could be more or it could be less. More knowledgable people could decide the number and mix.
No need for open borders.
John Henry
Phil 3:14
Nomenclature aside, you're ambivalent at best RE: Trump (as I read your comments, taken as a whole).
And you're not looking favorably on the Democratics.
So Althouse's question is troublesome if you're a Democratic.
“See what a know-nothing you prove to be? I'm no Trumpist.”
So says you. I’m not convinced. How do you differ from any other commenter here who are Trumpists? You sound just like them.
I would let people from all over come in provided they can be self-supporting, are not sick and are not criminals/terrorists/troublemakers. In other words the same conditions we have now.
The 1965 Kennedy law discriminates against those who would be self supporting. I know a couple from Germany. They won a lottery for immigration visas after years waiting. He is a master plumber. She is a midwife. They had 60,000 Euros in savings. They finally made it to Tucson where friends knew them and he is successful as a plumber. He said there was no chance that he would ever own his own business in Germany.
Immigration law was turned on its head in 1965 and I think I know why.
The biggest cost of open borders?
Medical care?
Third world diseases?
Lack of upward mobility?
Crime?
Burdens for social services?
Burdens on school systems?
Lower wages at the low end of the job market?
You and your fellow Trumpists are not my concern.
Foolish, as usual, comment. Why do you post this nonsense? Your only purpose in life is to troll people who like Trump;
Why are you not on your way to donate to those children who snuck in for medical treatment?
Someone mentioned that PDJT had given waivers to 30 refineries to not have to blend corn ethanol into gasoline.
I saw some comments elsewhere that this is going to hurt him in Iowa as it will drive corn prices down. A lot of corn production is for the ethanol scam.
What I've not seen mentioned much is that while this was going on, Japan agreed to buy a lot of corn. All of our surplus production is how one article put it. This one says $7billion worth plus digital products
Japan agrees to buy more U.S. corn under trade deal
Brian Straight 6 days ago
President Donald Trump announced the U.S. and Japan have struck a preliminary trade deal on $7 billion worth of goods. The deal is expected to be formally signed in September, The Hill reported.
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/japan-agrees-to-buy-more-u-s-corn-under-trade-deal
So I wonder how much the ethanol waivers are going to hurt the corn farmers. Hardest hit will be ADM and other ethanol refiners.
John Henry
Why are Inga threads always over 200 comments ?
\Waste of pixels.
An argument that would convince me if I were an undecided would be, “Don’t be like them, be better. Don’t align yourself with those who have no qualms about deporting sick children back to countries in which they surely will die. That is why they are here.”
In addition to being self-supporting, the immigrants would need to assimilate and become Americans. Not hyphenated Americans, as Roosevelt called them, but assimilated Americans.
John Henry
So lies then, Frankie.
Hardest hit will be ADM and other ethanol refiners.
This is a courage test for candidates. Bob Dole was called "The Senator from, ADM." Back in 2008, I had hopes that McCain would finally end this ridiculous ethanol payoff to farmers. Now, it sounds like Trump has negotiated the solution as part of the trade war with China.
Ethanol is loved by small engine mechanics because every year you have to have the carburetors rebuilt because of ethanol in gas.
Go away, Inga. You are an idiot. You've been banned once,.
Blogger Michael K said...
he is successful as a plumber. He said there was no chance that he would ever own his own business in Germany.
You may not know but I wonder what hoops he had to jump through to get a plumber's license in Arizona?
As a doctor, you may have some experience with getting licensed in different states.
The US occupational licensing laws, all state laws, are a crime in themselves.
Not against occupational licensing in general, though I think it could be better handled privatly (College of Surgeons accreditation for example.)
Makes it hard on a skilled person who emigrates here.
As a fellow Norwegian (and doctor), you may remember the story of Carl Zlinter when he tried to get a license in "The Far Country" (Oz)
John Henry
Franki just keeps repeating her arguments as if nobody had responded to them. I don’t know why people keep playing her game.
A self proclaimed psych nurse. Does anyone think that psych nurses are not infected with the lunacy seen in psychiatrists and psychologists?
She's not a nurse, she's a patient. I spoke with her daughter (she only has the one).
He is a master plumber
But he had to unlearn metric measurements!
I recently mentioned their crappy toilets. Wonder what other horrors their plumbing codes contain.
“Hardest hit will be ADM and other ethanol refiners.”
‘This is a courage test for candidates. Bob Dole was called "The Senator from, ADM." Back in 2008, I had hopes that McCain would finally end this ridiculous ethanol payoff to farmers. Now, it sounds like Trump has negotiated the solution as part of the trade war with China.
Ethanol is loved by small engine mechanics because every year you have to have the carburetors rebuilt because of ethanol in gas.”
Your comments are off topic, is this your playground? Maybe you should go read a book or take a nap or reread your Hippocratic Oath.
I don’t think this blog is the place to ask this question. Too many true believers and too few independents, let alone independents who will speak up.
Trump supporter and registered Independent here.
Would you like me to speak louder? Because I can...
PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...
I saw some comments elsewhere that this is going to hurt him in Iowa as it will drive corn prices down.
It's KILLING HIM!
In Jan 2017, when he became President, Corn was @ $3.34/bushel
In Jan 2019, it was @ $3.54/bushel, as of yesterday, it was $3.54
Iowa Cash Corn and Soybean Prices
If you're Growing corn; This is NOT what you want to see.... These prices mean higher income taxes
</sarc
If you’re an undecided farmer, how are you doing under Trump?
"Your comments are off topic,”
Trump’s courage in taking on ethanol subsidies isn’t off topic. I can see why you don’t want to talk about it. But maybe, like Jeopardy, we have to phrase it in the form of a Democrat talking point.
“What if I told you that Trump opposes environmentally destructive energy policies like the ethanol mandate? Would that make you change your mind?"
"If you’re an undecided farmer, how are you doing under Trump?”
Democrats. Carrying water for the Chinese since 1996!
Immigration - legal, illegal, visa overstays, etc. - should be limited to the number that will bring our birthdate up to 2.2. Once you hit that, it’s over. Deport everybody after that point and don’t allow any further legal immigration. If the Congress or the President wants to allow immigration for some moral cause, then only up to that point and all others should be stopped. Part of the problem with our economy is that allowing in more than the 2.2 birth rate puts too much stress on infrastructure.
We need to start bringing in lots of younger, rich Europeans as their countries implode or islamize. Keep the late-middle-aged out so they won't be eligible for Medicare/SS in a few years.
"So (back to FrankiM) the difficulty I see with your approach, is that a lot of convincible voters will want to ask any Democrat nominee, "what is your plan? Do you have a plan that will give us control over the borders and is less cruel than Trump's policy? Or do you just want to revert to the pre-Trump Obama policy that was less cruel but was ineffective in controlling borders?""
-- Was Obama's policy less cruel of just less covered?
Nomenclature aside, you're ambivalent at best RE: Trump (as I read your comments, taken as a whole).
And you're not looking favorably on the Democratics.
So Althouse's question is troublesome if you're a Democratic.
Agreed but again it was a close election 2016. Dems have rely upon more enthusiasm and more turnout. Can Joe Biden turn out more of the Obama coalition than Hillary?
And are there enough “hold your nose” 2016 Trump voters who “just can’t do it this time” and vote for none of the above?
PS I’ve told myself I would vote for Trump if Sanders was the Dem nominee. We can NEVER vote in a socialist. But I live in AZ so it’s pretty much a moot point. AZ is NOT, as much as the pundits would like it to be, a purple state.
"I imagine that should (for example) a Democrat win the presidency and the Republicans hold the Senate, that there will be "Investigatory hearings on the new president" from day one."
-- Based on what precedent do you have that Republicans will act like Democrats?
"My guess is Trump would sign changes to the law that handled the problems of these children."
-- He probably would. Trump has routinely offered the left huge policy wins for just a show of good faith, and the left refuses to even take gigantic, monumental wins he's offered them on a silver platter just to spite him.
So says you.
Yeah, I do. And I think I'm probably in a good position to know.
What an ultra-maroon.
Your comments are off topic, is this your playground?
Fuck you troll. I say that with all possible, courtesy.
As a fellow Norwegian (and doctor), you may remember the story of Carl Zlinter when he tried to get a license in "The Far Country" (Oz)
That was an unusual situation as the war had ended and, as he pointed out, there were Romanian doctors who might not be qualified.
California was notorious for the state licensing exams for dentists. An uncle of mine wanted to retire to CA and found that the state license board included questions on procedures that had been obsolete for decades. He retired to AZ.
Your son's other answer included, Bring up stats on how immigrants compare favorably with citizens.
Could be your son doesn't know that such stats are bogus. Assuming he's talking about illegal immigrants, there are some stats that they compare favorably with citizens of the same economic status. People don't usually mention that! Of course, illegal immigrants are on average pretty poor, and citizens of the same economic status are quite likely to be things like unemployed in the inner city or drug addicts.
For instance, illegal immigrants have a crime rate way above the median American, because the median American is way richer.
I knew a German woman, married to an American scientist, who had been a licensed physician in Germany but was unable to be credentialed here. [She committed suicide, presumably for unrelated reasons, such as her husband being a total jerk].
To appeal to a person truly undecided about Trump (as though such a person actually exists on this earth), the best argument against him would be that his style of politics is exhausting: every day, some new wild and wacky thing. If you're undecided, you're the kind of person who doesn't want to invest time in politics; you just want to live your life in peace. Trump thwarts that.
"What do you call it when the party can collect and handle your absentee ballots en masse?"
Bad enough, but the basic all-mail balloting destroys the guarantee of a private ballot even w/o vote harvesting. Both need to be done away with, and mail balloting should be restricted to those who really really need it.
I've been doing the reCAPTCHA thing for years and still haven't won any money!
Blogger FrankiM said...
No one believes an argument for open borders is going to win over an undecided voter. What I am asking undecideds to consider is this, do you want a president who’s policies are inhumane to fellow human beings? Especially children, sick children and the families of sick children. Do you want to align yourself with this sort of thing?
8/31/19, 7:57 PM
This is the nasty, deceitful and underhanded reasoning that is the Democrats. Inga/FrankiM is using this same old ‘for the children’ argument and is not worth arguing with.
And that is he reasoning (sic) that Democrats use against trump. They offer no solutions, just nasty hatefulness. As long as you follow their doctrine, they are nicey, nicey but underneath...
Replying to FrankiM who said, "No one believes an argument for open borders is going to win over an undecided voter," but Trump's policy is cruel. Right now, the options seem to be: Cruelty while moving in the direction of control over borders, or no cruelty with open borders. If this is how voters see the debate, and combined with the "open borders can't win", then you end up at "opposing cruelty can't win." I'm sure what you imagine or hope for is a policy approach that will be very effective in controlling borders but with less cruelty. But as far as I know, nobody has articulated such a policy approach. All we have on the "less cruel" side is policies that would be ineffective in controlling borders. If anything, the one candidate that comes closest to such an approach is Trump who would argue: (a) build the wall and keep them from getting here illegally; (b) cruel treatment and rapid deportation in the short run will discourage illegal immigration and thereby reduce cruelty in the long run.
Earnest Prole:
Nonsense. Bush Jr. was as noncombative as humanly possible and the Left still shrieked endlessly and exhaustingly about him. They will shriek about Trump every bit as much as they do now no matter how he behaves. Trying to make it his fault is just part of the shriek used against any and all Republicans.
"We need immigration, it is what makes America America. New blood, new ideas, new cultures strengthen us."
Violently disagree with this. America is what its founders made it. Immigrants can join and amalgamate into that, modifying it somewhat, but "new cultures strengthen us" is just meaningless ideological cant. What part of America is "stronger" because of "new cultures"?
"I'm sure what you imagine or hope for is a policy approach that will be very effective in controlling borders but with less cruelty"
I see no evidence that FringaM's thought processes extend that far. Sick babies are currently seen as the best cudgel to beat Trump supporters with, therefore they will be used. Effects on U.S. borders are irrelevant. FringaM has no position on border security, as such, until the Democrat/leftist issues her one.
Sorry, Qwinn, you failed to read the assignment. The question was not whether or how we might change Trump (as though such a thing were even possible).
Where is the Supreme Court? Where is Justice Roberts?
The most effective argument is the one being used everyday:
If you vote for Trump you will be hated by a whole bunch of unreasonable and self-righteous people, many of whom are violent and abusive. Half the country will hate you and try to destroy you if they find out. Do you really want to be a despised stupid racist and deal with all that?
This why you see very few Trump bumper stickers, and why the polls undercount millions of Trump voters.
I'm now a happy Trump supporter, but outside of this blog, I don't tell many people that. I feel like a secret supporter of democracy in the old Soviet Union. Got to watch what you say, and who you say it to.
My father and his late in life second wife used to have hats that said "Why be Normal?"
So, Igna;
IF 1 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
IF 10 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
IF 100 million sick kids want to come here and have us cure them; Should we?
At What Point, would YOU say; "Sorry, we're full" ??
Notice how this question wasn't even acknowledged, let alone answered?
John Henry,
"I think we can probably absorb about 1mm legal immigrants per year. "
Oh lordy me! Try dividing that number by 100, then let's talk. Really we need a moratorium to absorb the huge numbers we already have, and in the meantime engage in the impossible task of reinstituting an assimilationist ethic surrounding immigration.
"So I wonder how much the ethanol waivers are going to hurt the corn farmers."
Little, it sounds like, which is good if so.
"Hardest hit will be ADM and other ethanol refiners."
Nothing to dislike there.
Phil314,
"AZ is NOT, as much as the pundits would like it to be, a purple state."
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema would like a word with you.
Post a Comment