Trump to scrap protection for 'Dreamers,' give Congress six months to fix

[pegman]

15 hours ago, Jingthing said:

OK. Good. I think I have but if you're an American traveling in South America, it's only polite to learn how the people there prefer that you describe your nationality. I have definitely encountered sensitivity there about USA people calling themselves Americans or from America. 

You may well have been because it's our national past time giving Americans the gears. 

Edited September 6, 2017 by pegman

[pegman]

I think Trump is doing a pivot. He goes way back with good buddy Chuck Schumer and my guess is these guys talk daily about how to scratch each other's backs. Trump needed to give Ryan a chance, healthcare, that he knew he would fail at because of his stringent makeup. My guess is that a Dreamers Act was agreed to before Trump's announcement and we can start guessing as to what he gets in return. The debt ceiling agreement today was to break the ice to supporters on both sides. These guys are practicing Getting To YES, Harvard Press. 

[Credo]

1 hour ago, pegman said:

I think Trump is doing a pivot. He goes way back with good buddy Chuck Schumer and my guess is these guys talk daily about how to scratch each other's backs. Trump needed to give Ryan a chance, healthcare, that he knew he would fail at because of his stringent makeup. My guess is that a Dreamers Act was agreed to before Trump's announcement and we can start guessing as to what he gets in return. The debt ceiling agreement today was to break the ice to supporters on both sides. These guys are practicing Getting To YES, Harvard Press. 

I don't think he is really capable of working cooperatively with anyone, let alone Congress.   His world is one of Winners and Losers and he is the only Winner.   Always.   It can't be different, even if it is. 

[selftaopath]

12 hours ago, USPatriot said:

democracy based on laws. With out laws no democracy

45 is totally against rule of law. He abhors any restrictions especially legal ones.  So for his defenders to broach the topic of rule of law is ludicrous.  And if you don't know how he has disregarded The U.S. laws/constitution I might suggest consider doing more research.

[Ahab]

53 minutes ago, selftaopath said:

45 is totally against rule of law. He abhors any restrictions especially legal ones.  So for his defenders to broach the topic of rule of law is ludicrous.  And if you don't know how he has disregarded The U.S. laws/constitution I might suggest consider doing more research.

So you think President Trump (#45) should be able to change laws unilaterally just like the 44th President did with this executive order that bypassed congress (congress makes the laws, the President cannot change them).

 

It is disconcerting to hear that you support President Trump becoming a dictator able to change laws on a whim, but I don't think that is really what you want.  Remember, what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

 

What the last President did with DACA, was wrong for a Democrat and it would also be wrong for a Republican to attempt to change an immigration law (or any other law) without congress. 

 

Your post seems to be factually incorrect in stating that President Trump (I like typing that as much as possible in this post) is totally against the rule of law, when in fact he is following the highest law of the United States (which is the US constitution). Congress needs to amend the immigration law to include the DACA program, and the President can then sign, or veto the legislation. If he vetoes the legislation the congress can override his veto with enough votes. The President (any President) does not have the constitutional authority to change a law he does not like, or wishes was different. Perhaps someone needs to do some research on how a bill becomes a law under the US system of government, maybe it would help to pick up a used United States Civics 101 textbook on Ebay, or Amazon?

Edited September 7, 2017 by Ahab
grammer

[anon4546543]

On 06/09/2017 at 7:22 AM, ilostmypassword said:

In Thai, 5 is ha. So 555 would be pronounced hahaha

thank you

[Ahab]

On ‎9‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 9:41 AM, pegman said:

They can vote?

In many states in the USA an ID card is not required to register or cast a vote. It is considered "racist" by some on the left to ask people to provide a valid ID card to cast a vote.

[RobFord]

In many states in the USA an ID card is not required to register or cast a vote. It is considered "racist" by some on the left to ask people to provide a valid ID card to cast a vote.

 

Yes, and don't forget Republican gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is an a::hole too.

 

Republican victories and the subsequent Congressional districts established by Republicans in 2010 gave the party momentum to propose legislation regarding alterations to the electoral college. Their goal is to set up a congressional district system in their respective states, which would ultimately determine the outcome of the Presidential election through dividing electors amongst state districts.

 

Similar to gerrymandering, voter suppression laws are a way for political parties to gain an advantage through manipulation. The 2014 midterms witnessed minority populations in the South, and other parts of the country being targeted by such legislation. A major issue at hand were voter ID laws. Many states introduced newly established ones this cycle. 11 states had new voter ID laws, which excludes states where these laws will be implemented in future elections-such as NC.imrsimrs

 

http://electoralgeographies.web.unc.edu/gerrymandering-voter-suppression/

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[pegman]

6 hours ago, Credo said:

I don't think he is really capable of working cooperatively with anyone, let alone Congress.   His world is one of Winners and Losers and he is the only Winner.   Always.   It can't be different, even if it is. 

I think he can as long as it gets something passed. He could careless what it is since he has no principles. As long as he can tweet he is getting business done. His core could careless either because their support is more cult like than about what if anything he stands for.

[pegman]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

In many states in the USA an ID card is not required to register or cast a vote. It is considered "racist" by some on the left to ask people to provide a valid ID card to cast a vote.

So what I thought the answer is they can't vote. 

[Ahab]

On ‎9‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 0:15 PM, pegman said:

So what I thought the answer is they can't vote. 

If you don't need an ID card to vote in a state, anyone can vote. There is little to no oversight or checking so if you are in the USA illegally it is very easy to vote. You are correct that voting by illegal aliens is against the law, but they do not obey immigration laws so why should they give a crap about our election laws?

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, Ahab said:

If you don't need an ID card to vote in a state, anyone can vote. There is little to no oversight or checking so if you are in the USA illegally it is very easy to vote. You are correct that voting by illegal aliens is against the law, but they do not obey immigration laws so why should they give a crap about our election laws?

Because they break immigration laws to work. If they break election laws they  will lose not only their work but they risk jail.  Why would they do that?

[Ahab]

On ‎9‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 11:08 AM, RobFord said:

 

Yes, and don't forget Republican gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is an a::hole too.

 

Republican victories and the subsequent Congressional districts established by Republicans in 2010 gave the party momentum to propose legislation regarding alterations to the electoral college. Their goal is to set up a congressional district system in their respective states, which would ultimately determine the outcome of the Presidential election through dividing electors amongst state districts.

 

Similar to gerrymandering, voter suppression laws are a way for political parties to gain an advantage through manipulation. The 2014 midterms witnessed minority populations in the South, and other parts of the country being targeted by such legislation. A major issue at hand were voter ID laws. Many states introduced newly established ones this cycle. 11 states had new voter ID laws, which excludes states where these laws will be implemented in future elections-such as NC.imrsimrs

 

http://electoralgeographies.web.unc.edu/gerrymandering-voter-suppression/

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Republicans and Democrats gerrymander when they can. Referring to requiring someone to have a valid ID to vote is not voter suppression unless your political leaning are to the left of Lenin.

 

But I guess if you have to be alive, have a valid form of identification, and be a citizen of the United States in order to cast a ballot it could be a form of voter suppression, suppression of people voting illegally. If that is what you mean then you might have a valid point.

 

If you meant that requiring a valid ID is a form of actual voter suppression then you are spouting the illogical talking points of the leftist Democratic party of the United States.

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Because they break immigration laws to work. If they break election laws they  will lose not only their work but they risk jail.  Why would they do that?

To vote for someone that supports benefits for illegal immigrants? That might be one reason, and the risk of being caught is very low. Especially if you do not need a valid ID to cast a vote.

 

[RobFord]

So what I thought the answer is they can't vote. 

It very rare.

We all know where the Ahab is coming from.

Non-citizen voting is very rare.
Multiple nationwide studies have uncovered only a handful of incidents of non-citizens voting. Based on state prosecution records, votes by non-citizens account for between 0.0003 percent and 0.001 percent of all votes cast. Election officials agree that there is no serious problem of non-citizen voting in our elections. The National Association of Secretaries of State, whose Republican-majority membership includes the chief elections officers of 40 states, said they “are not aware of any evidence that supports the voter fraud claims made by President Trump.”

http://time.com/4669899/illegal-citizens-voting-trump/

http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/analysis-noncitizen-voting-vanishingly-rare


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Ahab]

Just now, RobFord said:

 

It very rare.

We all know where the Ahab is coming from.

Non-citizen voting is very rare.
Multiple nationwide studies have uncovered only a handful of incidents of non-citizens voting. Based on state prosecution records, votes by non-citizens account for between 0.0003 percent and 0.001 percent of all votes cast. Election officials agree that there is no serious problem of non-citizen voting in our elections. The National Association of Secretaries of State, whose Republican-majority membership includes the chief elections officers of 40 states, said they “are not aware of any evidence that supports the voter fraud claims made by President Trump.”

http://time.com/4669899/illegal-citizens-voting-trump/

http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/analysis-noncitizen-voting-vanishingly-rare


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

So how many illegal votes are OK with you? I made zero reference to Trumps outlandish and false claims. My point is in states that don't require voter ID, how many prosecutions do you expect to occur?

 

If you don't need an ID to validate who you are, and where you live, how in the heck are you ever going to find someone to prosecute?

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, Ahab said:

So how many illegal votes are OK with you? I made zero reference to Trumps outlandish and false claims. My point is in states that don't require voter ID, how many prosecutions do you expect to occur?

 

If you don't need an ID to validate who you are, and where you live, how in the heck are you ever going to find someone to prosecute?

In five states with republican governors, republican attorney generals, and republican legislatures full blown investigations were conducted into voter fraud. They all found virtually nothing. And clearly, these were people with a high motivation to find evidence of fraud.

In addition, voting is a right not a privilege. Licenses are for privileges, like being allowed to drive a car.

What's more, there is even discrimination there. These republican states purposely make it difficult to get a license. DMV offices are far and few in Southern Texas for example Texas refuses to have evening hours for registration which means poorer people have to miss work to register. Also, they discriminate even in regard to state licenses. Again, in Texas, a hunting license is okay, a driver's license works, but an ID card from the Texas University system doesn't. I wonder why that is?

In Georgia a lawsuit was brought against the governemt because lots of poor rural blacks didn't have cars to get to far away DMV offices. So Georgia came up with a remedy. A van to register voters. That's right, one van for the whole state of Georgia. And the Feds approved it. And you know who was in charge of the office that signed off on it. Hans Van Spakovsky - one of the right wing zealots leading the charge on voter id.

Voter ID checks are a solution in search of a problem.

[Ahab]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

In five states with republican governors, republican attorney generals, and republican legislatures full blown investigations were conducted into voter fraud. They all found virtually nothing. And clearly, these were people with a high motivation to find evidence of fraud.

In addition, voting is a right not a privilege. Licenses are for privileges, like being allowed to drive a car.

What's more, there is even discrimination there. These republican states purposely make it difficult to get a license. DMV offices are far and few in Southern Texas for example Texas refuses to have evening hours for registration which means poorer people have to miss work to register. Also, they discriminate even in regard to state licenses. Again, in Texas, a hunting license is okay, a driver's license works, but an ID card from the Texas University system doesn't. I wonder why that is?

In Georgia a lawsuit was brought against the governemt because lots of poor rural blacks didn't have cars to get to far away DMV offices. So Georgia came up with a remedy. A van to register voters. That's right, one van for the whole state of Georgia. And the Feds approved it. And you know who was in charge of the office that signed off on it. Hans Van Spakovsky - one of the right wing zealots leading the charge on voter id.

Voter ID checks are a solution in search of a problem.

Can't argue with that logic you have changed my mind and I now agree with your brilliance.

 

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, Ahab said:

Can't argue with that logic you have changed my mind and I now agree with your brilliance.

 

Sarcasm works best when it's backed by reason - or at least something more than just attitude. In your case, it amounts to a white flag. I accept your surrender as graciously as you offered it.

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

Sarcasm works best when it's backed by reason - or at least something more than just attitude. In your case, it amounts to a white flag. I accept your surrender as graciously as you offered it.

Actually just no point in arguing with someone who thinks asking for a valid ID card prior to voting constitutes "voter suppression". Some also equate this to racism, but since everything is racist these days in the USA I guess it does not matter anymore.

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Actually just no point in arguing with someone who thinks asking for a valid ID card prior to voting constitutes "voter suppression". Some also equate this to racism, but since everything is racist these days in the USA I guess it does not matter anymore.

Again, a solution in search of a problem.

[RobFord]

In five states with republican governors, republican attorney generals, and republican legislatures full blown investigations were conducted into voter fraud. They all found virtually nothing. And clearly, these were people with a high motivation to find evidence of fraud.
In addition, voting is a right not a privilege. Licenses are for privileges, like being allowed to drive a car.
What's more, there is even discrimination there. These republican states purposely make it difficult to get a license. DMV offices are far and few in Southern Texas for example Texas refuses to have evening hours for registration which means poorer people have to miss work to register. Also, they discriminate even in regard to state licenses. Again, in Texas, a hunting license is okay, a driver's license works, but an ID card from the Texas University system doesn't. I wonder why that is?
In Georgia a lawsuit was brought against the governemt because lots of poor rural blacks didn't have cars to get to far away DMV offices. So Georgia came up with a remedy. A van to register voters. That's right, one van for the whole state of Georgia. And the Feds approved it. And you know who was in charge of the office that signed off on it. Hans Van Spakovsky - one of the right wing zealots leading the charge on voter id.
Voter ID checks are a solution in search of a problem.

Nice. You're with ireason for smackdown of the year.

Kudos.




Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Scott]

I think the discussion of voting is off the mark on this topic and further deflection will result in suspensions.  

 

To vote you must be a registered voter.   To register you must be a citizen and there are various methods by states to verify that information.  

 

This has been discussed ad nauseam  in other threads and is nothing more than a deflection from the issue.