God bless America, and God bless President Trump

2/2/2017 10:07:26 AM

Still a woman involved

2/2/2017 10:20:34 AM

The Orange one has been able to do several things no other republican nominee would be able to do, given his yuuuge amount of personal wealth and lack of monetary dependence on big donors.

-Stand up to the liberal media bias/corruption
-Take a stand on illegal immigration

Bonus:
-Show that baseless "____ist, ____phobe" attacks don't work

4 more years, more SJW tears

2/2/2017 10:22:53 AM

The love for reality television throughout the lower rungs of society helped.

2/2/2017 10:31:19 AM

Quote :

" 4 more years, more SJW tears"

[Edited on February 2, 2017 at 11:27 AM. Reason : .]

2/2/2017 11:26:43 AM

i'm assuming thats an image for "hmmm, maybe 2"

2/2/2017 11:35:55 AM

2/2/2017 12:41:31 PM

lol, you posted the wrong photo. the headless snowman mean eight, not two

two looks like: 2

2/2/2017 12:42:49 PM

2 more supreme court justice picks
2 more years until 60+ republicans in the Senate

2/2/2017 1:15:04 PM

Quote :

"Yah I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure Hillary lost because she was a terrible fucking candidate, not because of some rando message board poster's opinion."

She won the popular vote by a significant amount.

She didn't lose over anything other than a bad strategy (given that you have to pick and choose the right states to campaign in to get the electoral votes). And that bad strategy included ignoring some important sub groups that finally came out to vote this year.

2/2/2017 3:45:20 PM

also, she was a terrible candidate.

2/2/2017 4:16:56 PM

Quote :

"She won the popular vote by a significant amount. "

thanks, California!

2/2/2017 4:28:13 PM

Quote :

"She won the popular vote by a significant amount."

Whenever I see this, all I read is

"California doesn't enforce immigration laws and millions anchor babies like handouts"

Why do leftists think the popular vote matters when we don't enforce borders?

2/2/2017 4:34:03 PM

that was weak

2/2/2017 4:51:49 PM

did you get any answers dtownral?

2/2/2017 4:56:03 PM

2/2/2017 5:00:37 PM

^^ yeah: theduke866 lost more than $350; ncsustinger shot himself in the foot voting against clinton and electing someone worse, is okay with it because they don't know how immigration worked, is a very low information voter; beatsunc thinks trump won because everyone is a sensitive snowflake; bridgetspk still needs to find someone to have sex with; Doss2k doesn't know who did the San Bernadino shooting; and eleusis can't count to 8 without sesame street

2/3/2017 8:40:35 AM

there is no bullet hole in my foot

and if the election were done again today knowing what I know now, I would vote for Trump over Clinton
and immigration is what they yell in the movies right before they round em up, its funny to watch

2/3/2017 9:12:59 AM

yeah, that's what i said, low information voter

2/3/2017 9:33:04 AM

sore loser voter

2/3/2017 9:44:23 AM

informed though :shrug:

2/3/2017 9:54:42 AM

Quote :

"Doss2k doesn't know who did the San Bernadino shooting"

Quote :

"On December 2, 2015, 14 people were killed and 22 others were seriously injured in a terrorist attack consisting of a mass shooting and an attempted bombing at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California. The perpetrators, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, a married couple living in the city of Redlands, targeted a San Bernardino County Department of Public Health training event and Christmas party, of about 80 employees, in a rented banquet room. Farook was an American-born U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent, who worked as a health department employee. Malik was a Pakistani-born lawful permanent resident of the United States."

I mean... wanna try again?

2/3/2017 9:57:19 AM

The Mentally Ill get to keep their guns.....YAY!

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/house-republicans-block-mental-health-gun-control-rule.html

So glad that Trump has the safety of this country as his priority!!!

[Edited on February 3, 2017 at 10:01 AM. Reason : ,,,]

2/3/2017 10:00:43 AM

I mean come on he banned all those terrorists!!

2/3/2017 10:19:57 AM

^^on the gun thing...they aren't rolling back background checks or anything. the original rule was probably over reaching. and i'm not super pro-gun or anything like that. but from what i've read, it's not really as black and white as it may seem.

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/ACLU.pdf

Quote :

"The rule includes no meaningful due process protections prior to the SSA’s transmittal of names to the NICS database. The determination by SSA line staff that a beneficiary needs a representative payee to manage their money benefit is simply not an “adjudication” in any ordinary meaning of the word. Nor is it a determination that the person “[l]acks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs” as required by the NICS. Indeed, the law and the SSA clearly state that representative payees are appointed for many individuals who are legally competent"

2/3/2017 12:43:29 PM

Quote :

"Jason Miller ?@longwall26 19h19 hours ago If Michelle Obama had insisted on living inside a golden tower at taxpayer expense white people would have burned this country to the ground"

2/3/2017 1:25:48 PM

^^^^

Quote :

"low information"

[Edited on February 4, 2017 at 12:07 AM. Reason : ]

2/4/2017 12:07:01 AM

More like "Dump", am I right?

2/5/2017 11:34:38 AM

if MO was anything like MT, it would have been open season on black people. The double standard is astonishing.

2/7/2017 6:41:24 PM

Quote :

"thanks, California!"

and

Quote :

"Whenever I see this, all I read is "California doesn't enforce immigration laws and millions anchor babies like handouts" Why do leftists think the popular vote matters when we don't enforce borders? "

Not sure if you're joking or not. But if you aren't....

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/nov/18/blog-posting/no-3-million-undocumented-immigrants-did-not-vote-/

News 21, a national investigative reporting project funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, found just 56 cases of noncitizens voting between 2000 and 2011.

A report by the liberal Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found that most cases of noncitizens voting were accidental. "Although there are a few recorded examples in which noncitizens have apparently registered or voted, investigators have concluded that they were likely not aware that doing so was improper," reads the 2007 report.

States that have tried to purge noncitizens from voter rolls, meanwhile, have found even government data lacking.

In 2012, Florida Governor Rick Scott’s administration started an effort trying to crack down on noncitizens voting by comparing driver's license data against voter rolls.

Through this process the Florida Department of State created a list of 182,000 potential noncitizens that had voted. That number was whittled down to 2,700, then to about 200 before the purge was stopped amid criticism that the data was flawed given the number of false positives — including a Brooklyn-born World War II vet.

Ultimately, only 85 people were removed from the voting rolls. State officials began to pursue a second attempt at a purge in advance of the 2014 election but then abandoned that effort, too.

Richard Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, called Phillips’ claim "fake news."

"There is no credible evidence I have seen to show large numbers of noncitizens voting in U.S. elections anywhere," Hasen said. "The idea that 3 million noncitizens could have illegally voted in our elections without being detected is obscenely ludicrous."

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/03/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

So, you should probably mention Texas, Florida, New Jersey, Illinois and New York as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_foreigners_to_vote_in_the_United_States

Since 1996, a federal law has prohibited non-citizens from voting in federal elections, punishing them by fines, imprisonment, inadmissibility, and deportation.[3][4][5] Exempt from punishment is any non-citizen who "reasonably believed at the time of voting (...) that he or she was a citizen of the United States," had a parent who is or was a citizen, and began permanently living in the United States before turning 16 years old.[3] The federal law does not prohibit non-citizens from voting in state or local elections, but no state has allowed non-citizens to vote in state elections since Arkansas became the last state to outlaw non-citizen voting in 1926.[6] A few local governments, most of them in Maryland, allow non-citizens to vote in their local elections.

Hasn't really been a big political issue in this country until 1996 onward apparently, most likely due to NAFTA opponents being pissed.

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:03 PM. Reason : asdf]

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:05 PM. Reason : asdf]

2/7/2017 7:02:20 PM

ITT Cherokee can't differentiate between anchor babies and their illegal alien parents.

2/7/2017 7:05:20 PM

Anchor babies are United States citizens. Therefore, they have the right to vote. Not sure what the problem with that is. That is not a case of illegal voting.

Also, anchor babies growing up in the United States typically exhibit United States cultural values so if you think that is somehow changing things, you'd be wrong.

Also, anchor baby births do not overcompensate for natural US births, so it doesn't skew the overall percentage of population in any way either...

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/09/11/number-of-babies-born-in-u-s-to-unauthorized-immigrants-declines/

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:08 PM. Reason : asdf]

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:08 PM. Reason : asdf]

2/7/2017 7:07:18 PM

To be clear, I actually think birthright citizenship should be eliminated. I'm just pointing out that it isn't affecting votes.

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:11 PM. Reason : a]

2/7/2017 7:10:52 PM

You don't see a problem with it because it exclusively benefits your side with votes. Anchor babies result from the law being broken initially by the parents, that is the problem. Deliberately ignoring federal law is a problem.

Anchor babies are much more likely to need government assistance and on average take much more out of the system than they put it. We are 20 trillion in debt, you can't have open borders in a welfare state.

Quote :

"anchor babies growing up in the United States typically exhibit United States cultural values"

The only thing immigrants are quick to assimilate is the belief that they are an entitled victim

2/7/2017 7:12:09 PM

Didn't say it wasn't a problem. Again, I said I would prefer it eliminated. What I did say, though, is that it does not affect votes in anything close to a meaningful way.

As for benefiting my side, I'm a registered unaffiliated voter. I voted for Hillary because she objectively was a better choice, not because she was a good choice. Simply the best choice we had. I would have easily voted for John Kasich if he would have won the primary.

Regarding needing government assistance: http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

Undocumented immigrants do not qualify for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits. Most of these programs require proof of legal immigration status and under the 1996 welfare law, even legal immigrants cannot receive these benefits until they have been in the United States for more than five years.

Non-citizen immigrant adults and children are about 25% less likely to be signed up for Medicaid than their poor native-born equivalents and are also 37% less likely to receive food stamps, according to a 2013 study by the Cato Institute.
Citizen children of illegal immigrants -- often derogatorily referred to as "anchor babies" -- do qualify for social benefits. Also, undocumented immigrants are eligible for schooling and emergency medical care. Currently, the average unlawful immigrant household costs taxpayers $14,387 per household, according to a recent report by The Heritage Foundation. But in its 2013 "Immigration Myths and Facts" report, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says most economists see providing these benefits as an investment for the future, when these children become workers and taxpayers.
A CBO report on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 concluded that a path to legalization for immigrants would increase federal revenues by $48 billion. Such a plan would see $23 billion in increased costs from the use of public services, but ultimately, it would produce a surplus of $25 billion for government coffers, CBO said.

Regarding 20 trillion of debt, you're failing to account for our Federal Credit. In other words, if you take the balance of all countries' debts into account, most of the national debt actually washes. That includes federal debt owed between various US entities which aren't foreign in nature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_States
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/10/09/5-facts-about-the-national-debt-what-you-should-know/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/05/the-u-s-government-doesn-t-really-owe-16-trillion-in-debt.html

You really should take time to do research rather than listening to talking points. That isn't an insult, just a bit of advice. Most of what you've said is wrong and that's dangerous when you're making decisions based on a lack of good information.

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:23 PM. Reason : asdf]

2/7/2017 7:21:13 PM

digging up GrumpyGOP's thread

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 7:26 PM. Reason : .]

2/7/2017 7:23:09 PM

Quote :

" "California doesn't enforce immigration laws and millions anchor babies like handouts""

That was the initial quote to which I was responding. Then I responded to your subsequent ill-informed claims.

2/7/2017 7:24:35 PM

I'm not sure what you don't get then.

Anchor babies vote 8 to 2 for democrats because they are dependent on big government handouts.

It's essentially importing the 3rd world for votes at the tax payer's expense.

I'll find my anchor baby net drain numbers... it's common sense though, if you illegally immigrate to the US you are poor, your anchor baby will be poor. Poor people in general will take more than they put into the system (over half of Americans do already). I'll find the study

2/7/2017 7:34:50 PM

I think that is a crock of shit. Every mexican I deal with has wads of cash. They don't mind working long hours. They look out for their own family. They don't have access to credit cards and other types of stupid predatory debt so they manage their money better than most every american person I know. How many average Americans can go pay cash for a car and not flinch? Every time I sell a used car to a Mexican they are over here breaking out $100 bills on the hood. How are they all that poor and destitute if they can pay cash for what they need? This guy that comes around mowing grass in my neighborhood went from driving a shit truck around with a push mower in the back to having a full landscaping trailer with professional equipment. Still only takes cash. Don't get mad when you snot nosed teenager is not willing to work that hard to get a business going because he has to wear Abercrombie & Fitch and have an off campus apartment for the "college experience" all on student loans...

The republicans feed this shit to the electorate because they don't want to admit that most mexican immigrants are willing to work harder and have more "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" than we have taught our own kids to have.

2/7/2017 8:46:30 PM

A Mexican is a great American.

2/7/2017 8:57:41 PM

they are definitely very hard working people. a lot of mexican immigrants get paid under the table, too, which i think is great. they're big on being independent and sticking it to the man.

2/7/2017 9:18:31 PM

Trump would be proud of them for not paying taxes. They would be squandered anyway.

2/7/2017 9:24:44 PM

The illegal immigrants are extremely hard working, because they escaped Mexico and appreciate any opportunity they can get here. It is hard to feel entitled when you personally snuck across a border illegally.

I'm talking about the anchor babies though. They grow up like any other poor kid in America, they see 3rd/4th/5th+ generation Americans with more wealth and feel as if they are victims because their illegal immigrant parent can't pay their way through college.

Anchor babies are more likely to be poor, and poor people are more likely to take more from the system than they put it. It doesn't help that poor people have higher birth rates either.

My point is, America already has more people taking from the system than giving, so importing uneducated, unskilled, high-birth rate, poor people... isn't sustainable given our current welfare state.

2/7/2017 10:21:07 PM

^do you have data to support this? If you have legit data to support this, I'd have to adjust my view but all you've done is typed out emotional responses with absolutely no facts to back it up.

To add to this:

How many children living with immigrant parents are in low-income families?

In 2014, there were 30.3 million children under age 18 living in poor families (i.e., with family incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty threshold) in the United States. Of them, almost 9.5 million (or 31 percent) were children of immigrants.

For state-level estimates, see the Demographics and Social Profiles in MPI Data Hub’s State Immigration Data Profiles.

So out of 30.3 million children living in poverty, 9.5 million of them are from immigrants. That's 1/3rd. That's a statistically calculated number which means if you want to talk about undocumented immigrants, that's even less. So, 2/3rds of poor children are US citizens who are at least 2nd generation.

http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states

That is not "most."

[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 11:23 PM. Reason : asdf]

2/7/2017 11:07:11 PM

http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Legal-Illegal-Immigrant-Households

The data on an issue like this is extremely politicized, your studies will lean left so I've posted one that leans right.

My main point isn't rocket science though: Poor kids in America will generally take more from the system than they pay in, and illegal immigrants create poor kids in America.

2/7/2017 11:34:20 PM

^the differences between rocket science and your main point start with the scientific method.

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) is a non-profit research organization that "that favors far lower immigration numbers and produces research to further those views."[2] It was started as a spin-off from Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in 1985.[3] The Center's self-described mission is to "provid[e] immigration policymakers, the academic community, news media, and concerned citizens with reliable information about the social, economic, environmental, security, and fiscal consequences of legal and illegal immigration into the United States."[4]

Reports published by the CIS have been widely deemed misleading and riddled with basic errors by scholars on immigration; think tanks from across the ideological and political spectrum; media of all stripes; several leading nonpartisan immigration-research organizations; and by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The organization has also drawn criticism for its financial and intellectual ties to extremist racists.[5][6][7][8]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Immigration_Studies

The data on the issue isn't politicized at all. The interpretation is. And again, I'm not trying to advocate for letting the floodgates open. I'm simply saying that if you've broken your leg and also been shot three times, you should focus on treating the gunshot wounds first, not the leg. Illegal immigrants have no impact on votes. Their children have minimal impact on our federal spending and long term, probably have a positive impact on our economy, especially considering our net population growth rate is like 0.7% (inclusive of "anchor baby" births).

Focusing on immigration is like treating the leg. We should be far more worried about other things if we want a meaningful change in direction. Then, once resolved, we can work down the chain to the other things.


[Edited on February 7, 2017 at 11:59 PM. Reason : a]

2/7/2017 11:49:34 PM

Yes, I read that on Wikipedia too before posting, hence I said it was "right leaning", because all of the sources criticizing it are for open borders.

I was just giving you the numbers you allegedly wanted. If you want to shit on sources that is my specialty:

-Clinton News Network is fake news
-MigrationPolicy.Org is leftist garbage

2/8/2017 12:01:43 AM

There's a difference between "right leaning" and being criticized for being intellectually dishonest. For instance, I wouldn't necessarily describe Fox News as intellectually dishonest, but certainly right leaning.

Migration Policy doesn't have any criticisms to that end of which I'm aware.

And since you've devolved to the "fake news" argument, I'll take that as a cue for the end of the "discussion." By the way, if you are actually considering CNN fake news, you should research RT and what goes on in Russia. You should also read up on the Soviet Union and get some real good insight into what fake news actually is. May cause you to be more thoughtful when casting that term.

Since you're not big on sources, here are a few for the Cold War:
https://www.amazon.com/Iron-Curtain-Crushing-Eastern-1944-1956/dp/140009593X
https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Mans-Bluff-Submarine-Espionage/dp/1610393589
https://www.amazon.com/Leningrad-Symphony-Terrorized-Immortalized-Shostakovich/dp/0802124305
https://www.amazon.com/Berlin-1961-Kennedy-Khrushchev-Dangerous/dp/0425245942
https://www.amazon.com/Man-Without-Face-Unlikely-Vladimir/dp/1594486514

TWW, I leave the rest to you.

[Edited on February 8, 2017 at 12:07 AM. Reason : a]

2/8/2017 12:06:54 AM

Quote :

"The illegal immigrants are extremely hard working, because they escaped Mexico and appreciate any opportunity they can get here. "

Ha, no. I jumped a fence illegally, and I feel bad for it. I am so thankful for the hard labor, low pay job, so Imma show the boss man that I appreciate him by working extra hard! Yessah massah!. Immigrants work hard because 1) it's generally in their culture 2) money 3) money 4) money 5) they can easily be replaced

Quote :

"Anchor babies"

Ah, the good ol' republican standby. BUT ANCHOR BABIES!!!11111 It's virtually a non-problem that you want to throw solutions at.

Quote :

"your studies will lean left so I've posted one that leans right."

2/8/2017 9:17:31 AM

Quote :

"Migration Policy doesn't have any criticisms to that end of which I'm aware."

It is pro-immigrant and very left leaning. Like I said, with such a politicized issue, any data will be very politicized. You can typically tell which way the study leans by how they refer to illegal immigrants. If they say "unauthorized" or "undocumented" it is a left leaning source in most cases.

Also spamming amazon links doesn't accomplish anything, if you can't understand CNN is a very left leaning outlet then that is on you.

Either way, I gave you the numbers. It is a very simple concept on top of that. Poor people = net drain on our system. Importing more poor people = bad.

2/8/2017 9:36:25 AM