Trump Grows A Pair, Gets Back To Winning

[AAAintheBeltway]

The dems argument is that the "Dreamers" will not accept the items in the Trump proposal. So they are obviously unacceptable and not subject to negotiation. We are doing them a big favor and somehow they feel they have the right to dictate what the terms of our surrender will be? Screw that. So if they will not "accept" it, what will they do? Leave? Oh no, not that.

The one thing that WE will not accept is amnesty now, enforcement later. We tried that once and know how it works out.

 

[Max E.]

IMO what Trump needs to do now is throw out an immigration bill that will get passed giving amnesty to dreamers with all of the caviats that were drawn up in the list of things he wants to accomplish in that memo, added border security, funding for the wall, added money for ICE and DHS to stop the people from flooding across the border, plus amnesty for dreamers, then if he can get the votes from republicans let the democrats be on the record as the people who vetod amnesty for dreamers, this should be a winner all the way for Trump if he plays his cards right, but like Tsing, i dont have alot of faith at this point with the lack of accomplishments.

The bottom line is we all know the dreamers arent going to get booted by either side, so he needs to get the votes together with republicans to pass this with all of the added security features, then let the democrats try fillibustering it in the senate. Then he can go out every day and just tee off on them for blocking the dreamers.

Getting humiliated by Big Luther's loss in Alabama must have been a rude wakeup call for Trump. Either that or Gen. Kelly took the weekend off and Javanka was tied up with the jewish holidays. Because Wild Man Trump is back and we know he loves the smell of napalm in the morning.


Because it smells a lot like...winning.

Trump had a grand week. First, he instigated a no-lose twitter war with the NFL thugs who have desecrated our modern day taxpayer-funded cathedrals with their disgraceful displays of contempt for our flag, our Anthem and our beloved president.

Then he doubled down by sending his loyal number two, VP Pence, to a Colts game so he could walk out in justifiable disgust when the ex-cons, wife beaters and drug abusers staged their moronic protests. Too bad you didn't do it when the Hamilton cast lectured you.

Then details of Trump's DACA plan were released or leaked, these days what's the difference? Fears among his base that a massive sellout was in the offing gave way to high fives as Trump's plan included everything from a wall to badly needed immigration law revisions. Can you say MAGA? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/t...art-immigration-reform-agenda/article/2636895

Finally Trump boldly announced a plan to gut Obamacare by allowing national health care plans to be offered through associations. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...-insurance-across-state-lines/article/2636861

For amusement, Trump slapped around Rocket Man while eating a double scoop of ice cream.

 

[Scataphagos]

Trump tweeting, Pence walking out of the NFL game, Trump's plans....and then his going after (verbally) NK does absolutely zippo for me.

It's all words, no actions. I no longer have faith in the man. If, and this is a big IF, he actually succeeds with...well, anything he said while campaigning, I will change that position. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, the man was elected, he appointed a conservative judge to the SCOTUS, and the rest has been an amusement park ride that I want my money back for paying for.

There hasn't been any winning. It's all been talking. Too bad there isn't a MATA (Make American Talk Again). Then he'd be in fulfillment of his promises.

While I'm tending to agree, Trump has effectively faced a Congress which is partisan DemoCrap... with enough RINOs also opposing his every step to throttle most every effort.

While it could be he NEVER gets "anything we conservatives want"* done because of Congress, I'm reserving judgement for now....

*Can't righteously compare his admin to Odumbo's... where the DemoCrap majority went along with every little whim, even the illegal ones, with nary a defection. Even worse... during Odumbo's first term, the Dems all but told the Repubs, "We've got a majority in the House and a super majority in the Senate. You Repubs might just as well go on extended vacation, because your vote doesn't count." Not the same with Trump and the Republicans.

FWIW..

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

People like to say we need to get accomplished businessmen etc in office. Well, this is what happens when you bring in an outsider. Trump of course is a bit over the top, but the kind of non-politicians who decide to run for president tend to be that way.

He has clearly been feeling his way the first year. He tried to work with the congressional republicans, even though most of them bitterly opposed him every step of the way and more importantly, do not share the policy goals that got him elected.

I think what we are seeing now is he is done with them. I am beginning to suspect that Bannon's resignation was more 3D chess. On the outside, Bannon is free to organize primary challenges to republican incumbents. Trump's twitter battle with Sen. Corker is an example of his new gloves off approach. He can read KellyAnne's polls and knows that the public despises congress, particularly the republican members, so he sees little downside. They weren't exactly rushing to pass his agenda anyway, so articles like in today's NYT that his feud with Corker jeopardize his legislative agenda miss the point. Congress is going to pass what lobbyists push for, and tax cuts are at the top of the list. DACA amnesty is win/win for Trump. Either he uses it as leverage to get his immigration plan, or democrats sink it and the DACA assholes can start looking over their shoulders for ICE agents.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Don't kid yourself. The NYT and WashPost articles about Trump poisoning his relationship with congress have it backwards. Republicans are shitscared of primary challenges from Bannon-backed MAGA candidates. The ones who are not running are also scared because of the potential that incumbents get knocked off and they end up losing the seat.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

The bottom line is we all know the dreamers arent going to get booted by either side, .

It will get dicey before it gets resolved though. I don't think that either side will take the position that dreamers need to be deported and work toward goal. I do think though that there is a chance- probably even better than 50%- that congress will not come to agreement before the daca extension expires in March, and if so, Trump will just let it expire especially if the left has not done anything other than demonize him for six months.

If/when daca expires again, I still dont think trump will set a goal of rounding up dacas and deporting them BUT I DO THINK HE WILL LET THEM BE DEPORTED IF THEY ARE DETAINED AS PART OF A RAID FOR OTHER REASONS. We are are already seeing this type of thing. Under Obama, the message was that if you are here illegally but have not committed a crime- we are not going to deport you or make you a priority anyway as long as you behave yourself. Trump and ICE are already doing things different. If you have not committed a crime and are not covered by a daca registration and ICE raids to pursue someone else and you get caught up and detained- then you are going to be deported to. That is one of the reasons why border crossings have plummeted. The word used to be that if you could make it across the border and live in the US without getting arrested for something then you were good to go. Now all these little villages are seeing people coming back who were deported just for being here illegally- what a radical move that is. So I agree that neither side is going to take action to boot out all the dacas but I also see a situation where trump will just let daca expired if he can't get a deal and let them fend for themselves with no law or executive order to protect them- with the idea that congress can always get their shiite together and fund the wall or whatever if they don't like it. Also, don't forget that daca gives the kids (who mostly all adults now) a work permit. So even if they are not deported, employers now have an illegal on their payroll and some- not all of course- won't have that. So the dems and others are playing a dangerous game of chicken here.

Also worth mentioning is the fact that trump has taken shiite from the dems but also from the republicans too and doesn't trust either one or have loyalty to either one unless the support him. What I am getting at here is that a lot of commentators and forum pundits keep pointing out that it is a matter of the dems and the pubs in congress reaching a deal. NO. It is a matter of the dems and the pubs reaching a deal that will not be vetoed by the president. If the republicans cave in areas that humiliate trump he will veto it even though "his party" supports it. He has no party for chrissake and the more he sees of bozos in DC the less he wants one.

In addition, if trump takes it up the bo-bo on obamacare and tax reform, iran, north korea and other things let's just say he is going to be in a bad mood on immigration even though in theory they are unrelated.

So, again, my point is that I don't see either side advancing a policy of booting dacas en masse, but I can easily see some/many dacas being deported if we go into overtime after march and trump does not extend. The dems of course dont care about the dacas. They think trump being a hardliner is a good thing to run against in 2018 midterms. Man, that's nuts. If daca expires there will be some being deported as collateral detainees in raids- as discussed- and it will get ugly. The dems will get primary-ed by other dems who take the position that we should be making whatever deal we need to make to save the daca kids and "we will fix the other stuff when trump is removed in 2020." That type of argument.

I haven't heard many hispanics say "if push comes to shove I would rather see my family deported rather than see a wall." Let them work that out with their lefty congressional rep and let us not forget the obvious here- ALL CONGRESSIONAL REPS ARE UP FOR RE-ELECTION IN 2018.

 

[Scataphagos]

I haven't heard many hispanics say "if push comes to shove I would rather see my family deported rather than see a wall."

I don't get why a border wall is a bad thing.

It's not like illegals have some sort of RIGHT to stampede our border, take jobs from Americans, and suck tit on the American taxpayer.

The border wall should have been erected years ago... and enforced like N. Korea enforces theirs!! IOW... We'll either jail you or "shoot your f'n ass"... STAY OUT UNTIL INVITED through legal immigration channels.

That "reasonableness" countermanded by political objectives to secure illicit votes... sadly for all of us.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION HARMS AMERICANS ON EVERY FRONT!!! We need politicians who will put a stop to it!! Trump tries, but Congressional reps who covet reelection cry, "NO.. we want to secure the Hispanic (and any other illegal) vote".... regardless to the damage done to America... to retain our power.

SICK!!

America... as intended by the genius Founders... will be lucky to survive the current Lefty assault.

 

[UsualName]

I don't get why a border wall is a bad thing.

It's not like illegals have some sort of RIGHT to stampede our border, take jobs from Americans, and suck tit on the American taxpayer.

The border wall should have been erected years ago... and enforced like N. Korea enforces theirs!!

There’s border walls and then there’s border walls. An actual wall is not really feasible in terms of cost and maintenance. People think it would be just a concrete wall but to be effective you would actually need two walls with a space in between to patrol, lighting throughout, manned stations, motion sensors above and below ground, etc etc , you get the idea. You don’t actually think the Great Wall of China is effective today, do you?

Securing the border requires a number of different approaches depending on the terrain and population centers. We should invest more in securing our southern border, but we should invest wisely.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

There’s border walls and then there’s border walls. An actual wall is not really feasible in terms of cost and maintenance. People think it would be just a concrete wall but to be effective you would actually need two walls with a space in between to patrol, lighting throughout, manned stations, motion sensors above and below ground, etc etc , you get the idea. You don’t actually think the Great Wall of China is effective today, do you?

Securing the border requires a number of different approaches depending on the terrain and population centers. We should invest more in securing our southern border, but we should invest wisely.

The biggest deterrent to illegals is removing the welcome mat and changing the policy Obama policy- and before- that essentially told illegals that if you can get in to the country you are pretty much all set if you do not get arrested. Trump has done that and that is why there has been a dramatic decrease in border crossing even before a wall is built.

It needs to be BOTH. Increased border protection AND the illegal needs to worry that they could be deported at any time even if they succeed in crossing the border or overstaying their visa. You know the longer they drift in this country, the more american citizens they crank out who cannot be deported and then the lefties dont want to deport the parents because that would be separating families because it would be inhumane to make the kids go with their parents. You know- it is the same even with the daca kids- most of them are between 26-36 and are not kids- but they have produced a lot of american citizens, lots of them.

The issue of people born on american soil but not being properly subject to American jurisdiction becoming american citizens needs to be revisited.....after trump appoints a couple more justices. Dont assume that the law is as settled there as you think.

 

[Slartibartfast]

"Trump has done that and that is why there has been a dramatic decrease in border crossing even before a wall is built."

You mean a further dramatic decrease?

Study says the number has been reduced to 170,000 in 2015, one-tenth what it was in 2005.