Biden and Trump at the border

[GMDino]

(04-11-2024, 04:36 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Hiring thousands of Asylum workers isn't gonna slow the process down at the border, it will only increase it.
smfh.

What is it you effing want? 

I want something that will help the border agents do their jobs.

HE wants whatever Trump wants. 

[*Nately120*]

(04-11-2024, 04:36 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Hiring thousands of Asylum workers isn't gonna slow the process down at the border, it will only increase it.
smfh.

What is it you effing want? 

Me?  I just wanted to point out how goofy that Kennedy guy is and how he's a perfect example of a pandering "fake regular guy just like all of y'all" politician. As for the border, I guess I'd prefer if Republicans didn't reject bi partisan solutions simply because a bad border helps Trump. 

[masonbengals fan]

(04-10-2024, 10:18 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Another guy with a doctorate level education from top 10 law school who has to act like a deep-fried southern dumbass to stay popular with his base.  At least he's being honest here, I guess.

I wish we had more like Mr. Kennedy. Guess that makes me a dumbass too. Common sense isn't so common anymore.

[*Nately120*]

(04-11-2024, 10:23 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: I wish we had more like Mr. Kennedy. Guess that makes me a dumbass too. Common sense isn't so common anymore.

The guy has a doctorate level education from a top 10 school, his sense ain't so common.  The manner by which politicians like him and folks like Ted Cruz pander to conservatives who went from suit and tie educated types to thinking higher education is bad is what intrigues me.  The GOP is at this interesting crossroads where if you've been a politician for a long time you have to hit on the same "working class" and "kiss my ass, you won't tell me what to do" and "I went to the school of hard knocks, not some wimpy college" vibes that legit modern day conservatives like Lauren Boebert more sincerely embody.

It just has to be interesting for a long-term republican like John Kennedy to be in republican politics so long that he had to switch up his gameplan because the people who vote for and against his side have almost completely flip flopped.

One thing I will hand to Trump, making a commercial where he puts on flannel and shoots guns and walks around and pretends he's "one of his base" is beneath him. He's one of the few accepted republican politicians who doesn't have to downplay his exceptionalism or advanced birthright.  Trump doesn't sit down at that cliched conservative down home diner and have breakfast with his base, he walks in and says "I'll pay for everything" and leaves.

[*pally*]

(04-11-2024, 10:23 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: I wish we had more like Mr. Kennedy. Guess that makes me a dumbass too. Common sense isn't so common anymore.

what common sense?

He voted against changing the asylum laws making it more difficult to be granted even temporary asylum.  That means far more people receiving hearings which will continue to take months and years because there aren't enough asylum judges.  Those people are granted the temporary ability to stay in the States until the hearing

He voted against more border agents.  More people, guns, drugs, etc get across in the first place as there aren't enough personnel to manage to volume

He voted against placing LEGAL limits on the number of encounters that would automatically trigger a shutdown of the border.

He voted against common sense restrictions and funding because  his party's candidate for President didn't want the current administration to have a "win"

Common sense requires doing what is right for the good of all...not doing what is right for your political aspirations

[masonbengals fan]

Without digging into each one of those I'd venture a guess he had good reason with each particular one.

Reasons that you would never post or agree with I'm sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82IHZdXzPNI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvMgPS66aUs

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-11-2024, 09:04 AM)GMDino Wrote: I want something that will help the border agents do their jobs.

HE wants whatever Trump wants. 

In that video you posted, it doesn't say anything about stepping in line with Trump. 

How is speeding up the process going to help the border agents? 

People will flock even faster, which just means more will try to enter illegally so they can jump the line.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-11-2024, 10:58 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: Without digging into each one of those I'd venture a guess he had good reason with each particular one.

Reasons that you would never post or agree with I'm sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82IHZdXzPNI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvMgPS66aUs

You are right, most of the more recent proposals have been Shite for the long term. 

Shutting down the border was a farce, they still have to approve a certain amount every day and it scales to 0 on the number of days they can shut down by year 4. It's far from a longer term solution, just a political hack move.

[Luvnit2]

(04-11-2024, 09:59 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Me?  I just wanted to point out how goofy that Kennedy guy is and how he's a perfect example of a pandering "fake regular guy just like all of y'all" politician.  As for the border, I guess I'd prefer if Republicans didn't reject bi partisan solutions simply because a bad border helps Trump. 

You fell for a liberal talking point.

Fact, there was no standalone border legislation. The proposal (which failed in the Democrat controlled Senate) included funding Ukraine for 60 billion and Israel as well.

Also read the bill and you will find out it would do little to anything to stop asylum seekers from entering the country. It allowed for up to 5000 illegal immigrants to enter the country PER DAY. The funding was more to add judges and processing than from prevention.

A bad border helps no one, ask the family of Laken (not Lincoln Joe) Riley and many other families who lost loved ones from drug overdoses and murder.

[*Nately120*]

(04-11-2024, 11:45 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You fell for a liberal talking point.

Fact, there was no standalone border legislation. The proposal (which failed in the Democrat controlled Senate) included funding Ukraine for 60 billion and Israel as well.

Also read the bill and you will find out it would do little to anything to stop asylum seekers from entering the country. It allowed for up to 5000 illegal immigrants to enter the country PER DAY. The funding was more to add judges and processing than from prevention.

A bad border helps no one, ask the family of Laken (not Lincoln Joe) Riley and many other families who lost loved ones from drug overdoses and murder.

If the bill was bad enough to be rejected on its own merits by republicans, why was so much "we don't want a win for Biden" sentiment put out there in response by republicans?  Seeing how they defended their reasons for rejecting border legislation is what led me to believe that it wasn't something they'd be justified in rejecting based on its lack of merit alone.

[GMDino]

(04-11-2024, 11:45 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You fell for a liberal talking point.

Fact, there was no standalone border legislation. The proposal (which failed in the Democrat controlled Senate) included funding Ukraine for 60 billion and Israel as well.

Also read the bill and you will find out it would do little to anything to stop asylum seekers from entering the country. It allowed for up to 5000 illegal immigrants to enter the country PER DAY. The funding was more to add judges and processing than from prevention.

A bad border helps no one, ask the family of Laken (not Lincoln Joe) Riley and many other families who lost loved ones from drug overdoses and murder.

You fell for a republican talking point.

The proposal included the funding because that is what the REPUBLCIANS asked for.  They would vote for the funding if they ALSO got a border bill to go with it.

They got it.

But their leader, Trump, told them to vote no.

They did.

[GMDino]

(04-11-2024, 11:31 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: In that video you posted, it doesn't say anything about stepping in line with Trump. 

How is speeding up the process going to help the border agents? 

People will flock even faster, which just means more will try to enter illegally so they can jump the line.

Listen, there is no answer you will accept except to close the border completely and throw out anyone here illegally no matter who or why.  I get that.

But doing something to work on the program is better than doing nothing because Trump needs an issue to run on. 

[*pally*]

(04-11-2024, 11:45 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You fell for a liberal talking point.

Fact, there was no standalone border legislation. The proposal (which failed in the Democrat controlled Senate) included funding Ukraine for 60 billion and Israel as well.

Also read the bill and you will find out it would do little to anything to stop asylum seekers from entering the country. It allowed for up to 5000 illegal immigrants to enter the country PER DAY. The funding was more to add judges and processing than from prevention.

A bad border helps no one, ask the family of Laken (not Lincoln Joe) Riley and many other families who lost loved ones from drug overdoses and murder.

It was Republicans who insisted on aid to Ukraine and Israel be tied to the border.  No aid without a border bill.  When a bipartisan group of Senators, including one of the most conservative men in the Senate, worked to do exactly that, Trump told his minions to kill it so that Biden couldn't get a win.  You can't escape that.

A true leader puts the good of his constituents ahead of what is good for him politically.  All Trump cared about was keeping the problem alive so he could exploit it.

The bill wasn't perfect for either side but that is the nature of most negotiated legislation.  No Trump-style bill will ever pass the Senate. Couldn't while he was President and won't if by chance he wins again.  

Edit: It was 5000 ENCOUNTERS, not entries.  You are falling for a Fox talking point.  5000 encounters could equal 0 entries.

[*Nately120*]

(04-11-2024, 12:09 PM)pally Wrote: A true leader puts the good of his constituents ahead of what is good for him politically.  All Trump cared about was keeping the problem alive so he could exploit it.

This is an interesting shift in Trumpian politics, since he must be going for low-information independents now.  Normally he'd be secure in his ability to just say the border is a total wide open failure and get support regardless of what is actually being done about it.  Republicans are walking a line where they need to be able to admit they're stalling on purpose, but also for that not to hurt them with swing voters.

Seems to me that if republicans willingly don't do anything about the border any bad person who comes across who does bad stuff is like having a bunch of Willie Horton moments that can be held against you...though I guess they can just say it's a Willie Horton you can pin on the left.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-11-2024, 12:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: Listen, there is no answer you will accept except to close the border completely and throw out anyone here illegally no matter who or why.  I get that.

But doing something to work on the program is better than doing nothing because Trump needs an issue to run on. 

Extreme false assumption.

I can think of many ways to curb Immigration little by little, and not just a wall only OR stopping all immigration.

You forget i'm 100% for legal immigration, but some of the asylum requests are simply BS and you know it. I bet half will say whatever they need to say just to get in, cause once in, they can play the system.

[*pally*]

(04-11-2024, 12:42 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Extreme false assumption.

I can think of many ways to curb Immigration little by little, and not just a wall only OR stopping all immigration.

You forget i'm 100% for legal immigration, but some of the asylum requests are simply BS and you know it. I bet half will say whatever they need to say just to get in, cause once in, they can play the system.

Absolutely, but US asylum law is written so loosely that virtually everyone is guaranteed a hearing which due to staffing and the backload can take years to get to.  The Republican rejected border bill would have changed the law so that only about 10% of asylum seekers would have qualified for a hearing and everyone else rejected and sent back to their country of origin

[*Nately120*]

(04-11-2024, 12:42 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I bet half will say whatever they need to say just to get in, cause once in, they can play the system.

Oh crap, sounds like they're ready to run for political office!

*RIMSHOT*

[GMDino]

(04-11-2024, 12:42 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Extreme false assumption.

I can think of many ways to curb Immigration little by little, and not just a wall only OR stopping all immigration.

You forget i'm 100% for legal immigration, but some of the asylum requests are simply BS and you know it. I bet half will say whatever they need to say just to get in, cause once in, they can play the system.

Maybe it was someone else who said they would change the 14th amendment.  If so I apologize.

But if you are for legal immigration you should WANT more people to process the people trying to get it in.  And WANT the process of citizenship to be sped up.

That would help immensely with the "illegals" who are simply illegal because they have been here waiting so long.

[*Nately120*]

I assume the border is like a lot of government programs where people and politicians swear they "want it to work" but they also want to cut support for it and when it struggles and fails they can say "See? The government sucks...give me more power and I'll fix it, and yes I'm also the government but come onnnnnnnnn I'm different!"

[masonbengals fan]

A true leader doesn't allow it to get to this point or wait till election year to even show concern.