Democrats vs Republicans

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 52
#31
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
Do you think that saving the lives of hundreds of Americans is something that should be considered or ignored when making policies?
It's more than just saving a few hundred lives though. It's the setting of a National Policy bar so that allowing the taking of 100 lives doesn't turn into a problem where the enemy becomes brave enough to kill millions of Americans.

Similarly, Border policy isn't JUST about locking up a few hundred kids in cages. It's about setting a National Policy so that allowing hundreds of kids to become American citizens doesn't turn into a million kids.
#32
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Bringerofrain
In fact a part of Trump's platform called for increasing legal immigration.
Trump’s 4 years in office was a full on assault on all immigration. He even railed against “chain migration” which is oddly how his own in-laws got into the US.
#33
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Trump’s 4 years in office was a full on assault on all immigration. He even railed against “chain migration” which is oddly how his own in-laws got into the US.
I'd like to see your detailed evidence about how Trump was definitively against merit-based legal immigration.

#34
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Show me evidence that he actually did anything about it. You can’t because he waited till months before the election to announce his “plan” and used it for all he really cared about... an opportunity to talk about all those drugs and gang violence being brought into this country by the scary brown people.
#35
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Show me evidence that he actually did anything about it.
He doesn't have the power. Elites in Congress do. That said, I am still correct since you have no evidence.

“I don’t see that the will is there to do it. I commend the White House and the President for what I think is going to end up to be sort of a broad outline of things that are important, but I’m unfortunately pessimistic as to what the future holds,” Sen. Shelley Moore-Capito, R-West Virginia, said. “I just think both sides are going to have a hard time getting together on this.”
#36
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
That said, I am still correct since you have no evidence.
No evidence for a claim I never made. Wow, you got me.

I claimed his 4 years were an assault on immigration, legal and non. Your response only furthers my point since the only thing you had to say to that was to point towards an entirely different system that isn’t what this country does and say “see, look at what he is for”. In other words, he’s against everything we’re currently doing and have been for decades at the least.

But as far as the proposal itself, here is the part of your article I found amusing...

“the vagueness of the proposal has allowed the president’s critics to paint it in the darkest possible light, which is, of course, to be expected”

In other words, he didn’t even unleash a full plan, just an idea. So after 4 years of a presidency whose biggest promise was in regards to immigration, this is what he’s got? And it took him till 6 months before Election Day to make his proposal? Gee, I wonder what that was about.

Actually, no I don’t. Trump doesn’t care about any of this. All he cared about was getting re-elected. It’s why he told us he was going to put this plan into action via an executive order back in July, just like he told us on numerous occasions he was going to be releasing a new healthcare plan “in two weeks”, just like the middle class tax cuts he promised days before the 2018 mid terms. What he says at a rally or press conference is meaningless. Do better.
#37
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
My response had nothing to do with supporting your baseless claim that Trump is against all legal immigration which includes merit-based immigration. Why even bother responding if you are going to appear delusional to everyone? I get that straw-manning Trump with wild hyperboles was a really fun game the past 4 years, but evidence is evidence. And you have none.

allowed the president’s critics to paint it in the darkest possible light, which is, of course, to be expected”
Thanks for furthering my point about the delusional hyperbolic expected attacks by critics.

Delusional people speak only in hyperboles. I can't believe you actually think a typical "ALL" statement denotes any kind of deep nuanced well examined thinking.
Occams Razor suggests you must be trolling.

#38
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
My response had nothing to do with supporting your baseless claim that Trump is against all legal immigrationwhich includes merit-based immigration.
My claim that his 4 years were an assault on all immigration pertains to real life, not some hypothetical system he concocted at the last minute. See here for a list of actual real world examples.

Thanks for furthering my point about the delusional hyperbolic expected attacks by critics.
It didn’t further your point, what he said was common sense. If you actually read your own article he was making a point about the vagueness being a breeding ground for attacks. That’s politics. Don’t even pretend republicans are any different.

Delusional people speak only in hyperboles
Coming from someone who supports Trump... just... wow.
#39
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Your article you linked looks like it was drafted by a lobbyist group, probably big business looking to exploit illegal labor.

Grats on being a useful sheep.

Maybe you should examine why lobbies won't allow Congress to do anything rather than watch the pretty Trump birdie and go duhhhh.

Coming from someone who supports Trump... just... wow.
From someone who blindly supports crony Congress establishment and their lobbies...just...well whatever.

“I don’t see that the will is there to do it. I commend the White House and the President for what I think is going to end up to be sort of a broad outline of things that are important, but I’m unfortunately pessimistic as to what the future holds,” Sen. Shelley Moore-Capito, R-West Virginia, said. “I just think both sides are going to have a hard time getting together on this.”

For decades now, America’s been developing an immigration industrial complex: a self-perpetuating machine whose gears are greased with lobbying funds forever topped up by slashed labor costs and increased consumption spurred on by record high and rising population growth. Whenever pro-enforcement bills manage to push through the tide, they’re either defunded or ignored. Take the 2006 Secure Fence Act that promised 700 miles of fencing along the southern border but never got the funding.
#40
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Your article you linked looks like it was drafted by a lobbyist group, probably big business looking to exploit illegal labor.

Grats on being a useful sheep.
Did you even bother to read it, or at least skim through it? It went into great detail on everything I just talked about. I was not expecting you would, but you could at the least not pretend that some advertisement you must have seen was thing thing I was pointing to.

From someone who blindly supports crony Congress establishment and their lobbies...just...well whatever.
I find the “blindly” comment very telling. If you would actually focus on the things I’m arguing and the actual point of the sources I’m providing then maybe we could have a real conversation. Sadly, it appears all you have is projection.
#41
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
For decades now, America’s been developing an immigration industrial complex: a self-perpetuating machine whose gears are greased with lobbying funds forever topped up by slashed labor costs and increased consumption spurred on by record high and rising population growth. Whenever pro-enforcement bills manage to push through the tide, they’re either defunded or ignored. Take the 2006 Secure Fence Act that promised 700 miles of fencing along the southern border but never got the funding.

But you think this is a "Trump problem" only because you were told it was a Trump problem.

(If only he REALLY cared about legal immigration but my trusted mindreaders told me what was in his head. His Nazi brain wants racial supremacy that's it. That's why we have a problem)

This is why we can't discuss things.

Did you even bother to read it

Yeah. Would you like me to list in order the baseless and ultimately meaningless hyperboles in that puff piece or are you willing to discuss actual underlying problems with immigration? You know, the same problems that are making Biden put thousands of kids in cages right now?


This is the actual problem that has been around long before you were told to worry about Trump.
#42
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
But you think this is a "Trump problem" only because you were told it was a Trump problem.

(If only he REALLY cared about legal immigration but my trusted mindreaders told me what was in his head. His Nazi brain wants racial supremacy that's it. That's why we have a problem)

This is why we can't discuss things.

You begin by telling me what I believe and why and then present a caricature of what I believe to make the point about why we can’t discuss things. Ok bro.

Would you like me to list in order the baseless hyperboles in that puff piece or are you willing to discuss actual underlying problems with immigration? You know, the same problems that are making Biden put thousands of kids in cages right now?
Trump wasn’t criticized because we ended up housing children at the border, he was criticized because he made it his literal policy to take the children away from their parents, creating an artificial need to house those children at the border. These two things are not the same.

#43
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
he made it his literal policy to take the children away from their parents,
You are so out of touch with the truth about what is going on at the border. Parents have been and are now sending kids there unaccompanied (many paying their life savings to do so) knowing their kids will have a better life in America and their kids can't be deported. This was going on long before Trump was president and you were told to care.

There was nobody "ripping kids out of the arms of parents" The shelters were for unaccompanied minors. The parents of a large majority of these kids made the choice to take the risks of illegal migration and sent their kids to the border unaccompanied.


After the child migrant crisis broke out earlier this summer, some reports say that smugglers spread rumors about a possible immigration amnesty. What is clear is that smugglers seem to know that Central American children who make it to the border are not immediately deported back, thanks to a 2008 anti-trafficking law and to the backlog of cases in immigration court.

According to a 2012 study by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, a majority of migrants report using the services of a smuggler. In the case of children migrants, Elizabeth Kennedy, a Fulbright scholar and researcher on child migration in El Salvador, estimates that more than half the children are smuggled using coyotes.

I remember reading an article a few years back where the government tried to reunite some kids with their parents, and their parents refused to take the kids back to their home country, essentially denying that they were the parent so that their kids would become Americans. If the parent just spent their life savings paying a smuggler to send their kids across the border, why on earth would you reasonably think the parents WANT to be reunited with their kids? Maybe in the future, Biden and Congress might make a law granting amnesty to these parents, but until that time, those kids in cages won't be reunited.

creating an artificial need to house those children at the border.
No, it was a 2008 law from Congress, not Trump. Are you even willing to listen to a sentence about real-world problems that does not have the word "Trump" in it?


Amnesty has been supported for decades by ultra-rich labor lobbies, knowing it will lead to a flood of cheap illegal labor. Most people are instructed by the media to care about people outside of America so they won't pay attention to the millions of displaced poor Americans from immigration policies that mainly benefit the ultra-wealthy. It's this kind of unexamined mindless virtue-signaling that makes the nation susceptible to the manipulation of the "good-hearted" by the wealthy elites by supporting toxic policies that appear virtuous at a fleeting glance.

Sanctuary cities are the last bastions of the exploitive ultra-rich and the capitols of wealth inequality.
#44
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
This discussion has made me very curious about another phenomenon.

How do you feel and how do you rationalize it when the ultra-rich lobbies support the same positions as you do assuming you acknowledge that ultra-rich lobbies do not have your interests in mind at all.

In other words, what is your thought process for when this happens?
#45
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
There was nobody "ripping kids out of the arms of parents" The shelters were for unaccompanied minors. The parents of a large majority of these kids made the choice to take the risks of illegal migration and sent their kids to the border unaccompanied.
This is not relevant to what we were discussing. Unaccompanied minors have been a problem for a long time. It’s serious and complicated, and it’s why Obama had many of the facilities built that conservatives would later use as a “gotcha” to pretend what Trump was doing was no different.

What was different, and what caused the outrage, was Trump’s zero tolerance policy where they put every parent who crossed the border in criminal detention forcing the child to be separated. This was a calculated decision that Trump, Jeff sessions, and John Kelly all admitted was done as a deterrent. So no, what Biden is doing now is not the same thing. Family separations happen and probably always will, but Biden is not using it as a political strategy.
#46
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
How do you feel and how do you rationalize it when the ultra-rich lobbies support the same positions as you do assuming you acknowledge that ultra-rich lobbies do not have your interests in mind at all.
My positions are based on logic stemming from my core values. I couldn’t give a shit less who else supports those same positions.

If you’d like a more detailed answer you are welcome to provide an example.
#47
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
I couldn’t give a shit less who else supports those same positions.
That's a shame then.

they put every parent who crossed the border in criminal detention forcing the child to be separated.
Every president did this since 2008. Trump was just vocal about it.


Presidents can't actually circumvent the laws Congress passes. You are looking at the wrong people for solutions.
#48
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
but Biden is not using it as a political strategy.
That's highly debatable looking at the many pro-illegal immigration lobbies that helped him get elected.

8 days later

Topic's author
#49
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
just use bullet points for your main sentence

Why should we have open borders

1) It is consistent pro liberty ethic and consistent with our ethos of being a pro liberty republic.  Britain is land of the British.  France is land of the French.  China is land of the Chinese.  These are all ethnostates, which are based on ethnicities.  America is not like these ethnostates.  America is based off an idea.  That idea is to promote god given liberties and secular victimless liberties abroad and domestically.  America is land of the free.

2) The US debt is paid off in 4 years while giving everyone a tax cut, due to our population, GDP, and tax revenue roughly quadrupling and as a result, paying off the debt becomes significantly easier.

3) America's GDP gets a one time boost of 400%, and rather than America having to compete with China for influence, America would dominates the world stage way more because of our skyrocketed GDP.

Topic's author
#50
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
Do you think that saving the lives of hundreds of Americans is something that should be considered or ignored when making policies?
Lets look at precedent to answer this question:

4,000 Americans die from not having an organ each year.  Is the solution to this to make organ donation mandatory?  Or is it worth ignoring in the name of liberty for everyone else that doesn't die from this?

30,000 Americans die of car accidents every year.  Is the solution to this to make speed limits 4 mph on the highway?  I mean, it would save tens of thousands of lives.  Or is it just worth ignoring in the name of liberty for everyone that doesn't die from this.

36,500 Americans die from guns every year.  Is the solution to ban guns?  I mean, it would in theory save tens of thousands of lives a year.  Or is it just worth ignoring in the name of liberty for everyone that doesn't die from this.

500,000 Americans have died from the coronavirus pandemic this year(which to put into reference, is comparable to the number of unborn babies that die each year from abortion in the US).  Is it therefore justified to do indefinite lockdowns?  I mean, it would save hundreds of thousands of lives.  Or is it just worth not doing lockdowns in the name of liberty for everyone that doesn't die from this.

2 million starving 3rd worlders die every year from starvation.  Is the solution to this to force people to rescue 3rd worlders, or is this an infringement of the liberty of the people with recourses since they never consented to this?

Conclusion: If the United States government doesn't do extremely authoritarian things to save 4000, 30000, 500000, or millions of lives per year, why should the US government do comparably authoritarian policies (like make immigrants go through so much just to get the same liberties that I got by being born here through no work of my own) just to save a few hundred lives from terrorism?  We should punish terrorists, but leave every peaceful person alone.  Freedom is dangerous as hell, but it makes America America, and God bless the US.
Topic's author
#51
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@fauxlaw
The text of the EO never once mentions "Muslims." It identified countries, not religions, or any other group of people by which they might self-identify other than by nationality.
So, the law banned people from certain ethnicities.  This still seems too authoritarian and tyrannical.  Banning all Syrians because of terrorist attacks most don't want to do is like banning AK 47s for mass shootings that most AK 47 owners don't want to do.  You punish actual terrorists, you punish actual mass shooters.  You leave everyone who is peaceful alone.

Further, note that the Oba'a adminstration identified the same countries, and no one, not one pitiful cancel culturist called him a racist against Muslims. So, why Trump? Because you have an agenda, but not one against Oba'a?
I don't think Obama did that, otherwise Trump wouldn't have felt the need to do it, but I don't want people deported whether Joe Biden or Obama does the deporting, or Trump does the deporting.  I don't want to give immigrants free shelters or air conditioned cages whether Biden gives them the shelters or Trump gives them the shelters.  I want the government to leave undocumented immigrants alone, whether the person in charge is a republican or a democrat.
#52
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
1) It is consistent pro liberty ethic and consistent with our ethos of being a pro liberty republic.  Britain is land of the British.  France is land of the French.  China is land of the Chinese.  These are all ethnostates, which are based on ethnicities.  America is not like these ethnostates.  America is based off an idea.  That idea is to promote god given liberties and secular victimless liberties abroad and domestically.  America is land of the free.
true in a way but liberty also means the right to self-govern and the right to control your OWN sovereignty and destiny, having a strong sense of borders and sovereignty actually helps the idea of America being a pro-liberty state.

2) The US debt is paid off in 4 years while giving everyone a tax cut, due to our population, GDP, and tax revenue roughly quadrupling and as a result, paying off the debt becomes significantly easier.
no, the larger the population is, the larger the budget has to account for them, statistically speaking, welfare, and costs will increase. Plus, we have taken in a lot more immigrants but the debt seems to be still going up.

3) America's GDP gets a one time boost of 400%, and rather than America having to compete with China for influence, America would dominates the world stage way more because of our skyrocketed GDP.
So what? GDP has gone up and the cost of living, housing, quality of life, wages, general health, innovation, have all gone down. Muh GDP is never a good indicator of a particular country. LOL, the key to beating China is making sure that the American PEOPLE are moral, religious, healthy, have a good stable career that fulfills them, and are making FAMILIES, China is DESTROYING us and it is because of these factors. But before China, we have to deal with American tyranny.