White House meeting between Trump, Pelosi, and Schumer.

desertdroog

Member
Aug 12, 2008
2,019
402
785
Indiana has more electoral votes (11) than Wisconsin (10), which is a democratic represented state. Trump took 26 electoral college votes from the Democrats (Wisconsin 10, Michigan 16), so I was curious what his point was, really.

Is he saying states like Wisconsin doesn't matter like he says Indiana doesn't matter? The Democrats aren't regretting losing blue states to Trump?

I thought it might have been a dig against former Indiana Govenor Pence, but I didn't think Schumer would pick a fight out of the blue with him.

North Dakota is an R+17 state, and Indiana is an R+9.

It would be like a Democratic President bragging that he won Hawaii (D+18) and Rhode Island (D+10).
 

Zangiefy360

Member
Aug 30, 2018
534
839
230
Have you ever said anything positive about a democrat? Honest question, I’m genuinely curious. My limited exposure to your posts seems to show 100 percent opposition to anything non-Trump but I could be wrong
I'm (clearly) a big fan of Trump, but I'm not aligned with any particular party. I've voted for Democrats and Republicans in the past. Once Trump is out of office, I'll be a free agent again, and I'll see which candidate speaks to me more.

But honest question. what have the Democrats done since the 2016 election that's worthy of praise? From my perspective, the party is rife with obstruction, identity politics, smear campaigns. open borders, and zero ideas for improving the lives of American citizens. The party doesn't speak to me and what I think is important at all. I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt because they haven't earned it.
 

TekNav

Banned
Nov 27, 2018
245
162
160
But honest question. what have the Democrats done since the 2016 election that's worthy of praise?
Championed practically every cause that's supported by a majority of the populace, like universal background checks (90%+ approval) defending pre-existing condition clauses (80%+ approval), opposing $2.5 trillion in deficit-financed tax cuts for the rich (less than 40% approval), expanding protections for DREAMers (80%+ approval), opposing a multi-billion dollar monument to white nationalist cowards (less than 40% approval), and protecting the FBI's criminal investigations of the Trump administration (60%+).
 

ssolitare

Manbaby: The Member
Jan 12, 2009
16,368
1,567
935
Except Obama was president for 8 years and never attempted any of this. Amazing.
Yes he did. Democrats give more funding to border security. Under Obama deportations and company audits/raids picked up.

One reason why immigration reform wasn't pushed more initially under Obama was because the economy was terrible.

The 2007 bill would have been nice, but the economy said otherwise.

I'm (clearly) a big fan of Trump, but I'm not aligned with any particular party. I've voted for Democrats and Republicans in the past. Once Trump is out of office, I'll be a free agent again, and I'll see which candidate speaks to me more.

But honest question. what have the Democrats done since the 2016 election that's worthy of praise? From my perspective, the party is rife with obstruction, identity politics, smear campaigns. open borders, and zero ideas for improving the lives of American citizens. The party doesn't speak to me and what I think is important at all. I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt because they haven't earned it.
Are you even familiar with the platform?
 

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
This whole meeting was a trainwreck, at least if we go by the public remarks.

But honest question. what have the Democrats done since the 2016 election that's worthy of praise? From my perspective, the party is rife with obstruction, identity politics, smear campaigns. open borders, and zero ideas for improving the lives of American citizens. The party doesn't speak to me and what I think is important at all. I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt because they haven't earned it.
Conversely, the Republicans spent eight years carrying out massive obstruction. Various members of the party have gotten elected to public office through white identity politics and smear campaigns (another fitting time to remember the "birther" conspiracy, but it certainly isn't limited to that one example). It's a fallacy to claim Democrats want open borders when, strictly speaking, that is a minority position within the party. Not mention the only alternative to what Trump wants isn't restricted to that. Both parties have their own ideas about how to improve the lives of citizens, from their own ideological perspectives. You are free to choose which party or candidate represents you the best, but being inaccurate about that doesn't help anyone.
 
Last edited:

lil puff

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,723
815
240
The Democrats don't feel one way in unison, there is a lot of conflict and divide.

Dreamers was a start, expand on that and people with temporary status.

Good reading too:


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/10/10/magazine/the-democrats-have-an-immigration-problem.amp.html
Yep, good reading. Thanks for sharing. It is what I've evidenced.

Being silent on it, however, is not the right way. They can disagree, that's normal. But rather than deflect the topic, they should be vocal and point out their angles on reform.

Dreamers, temporary status and asylum are 3 points I'm sure they can start to shape a clear message of consensus on. However, dismissing illegal immigration outright is just scoring a touchdown for the other team. They need to lock themselves in a room and sort a message out. The GOP is good at this right now. They don't agree on every aspect of reform but they collectively express a clear platform that resonates with their constituents.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
3,910
2,579
415
The meeting was an overwhelming success for Trump. They walked into a trap and ended up on camera with him when he said I will shut the government down for border security. He now controls the narrative when a shut down occurs with respect to his base who put him there for that very reason. He wasn't there to make a deal. He was there to campaign.
 
Jun 26, 2018
1,050
747
235
42
Milwaukee, WI
Exactly the kind of alternate reality we've all come to expect from the people who choose to get their "current events" from chain emails, meme pages, and Fox News.
You're going to blame the Republican Congress for Obama's failures? What a joke. Even PBS knows it was his most glaring failure. Especially when he campaigned heavily on reforming the process.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/immigration-stands-as-obamas-most-glaring-failure

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s inability to overhaul the nation’s immigration system will stand as the most glaring failure in his effort to enact a vision of social change. Despite two campaigns full of promises and multiple strategies, he imposed only incremental, largely temporary modifications.

When his presidency ends in January, Obama will leave behind an outdated and overwhelmed system, with some 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally.

But Obama also will be remembered as a president who prioritized other issues, missing perhaps the best chance to pass sweeping legislation and only reluctantly adjusting his strategy in the face of firm opposition.

And his administration aggressively enforced current laws, deporting more than 2.4 million people. The total is nearly as many as his two predecessors combined.
 

TekNav

Banned
Nov 27, 2018
245
162
160
When the President promises to do something that 80%+ of the nation supports, but Republicans filibuster every attempt in the Senate - no, I'm not going to blame the President. I'm going to blame the Republicans and the assholes who vote for them.

You should try exercising some civic integrity and principles. You'll find the world makes a lot more sense that way, instead of blaming everything on the black guy.
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2018
1,050
747
235
42
Milwaukee, WI
Democrats give more funding to border security. Under Obama deportations and company audits/raids picked up.
Reality check. Obama wanted billions with no promise of reform. Hence his tremendous failure.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/09/us/obama-seeks-billions-for-children-immigration-crisis.html

Speaker John A. Boehner said the president’s plan failed to deploy the National Guard, an idea the White House said would not be effective. And Representative John Carter of Texas said he was wary of any measure that gave Mr. Obama too much autonomy.

“The president caused this self-inflicted crisis on the border by refusing to enforce the law,” said Mr. Carter, a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, which is likely to be asked to approve the request. “And now he is requesting a $3.7 billion bailout from the taxpayers to rectify his mistakes.”

Some Democrats, like Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, have expressed strong misgivings about any plan that would allow for unaccompanied children to be sent back home to dangerous situations.
 
Jun 26, 2018
1,050
747
235
42
Milwaukee, WI
When the President promises to do something that 80%+ of the nation supports, but Republicans filibuster every attempt in the Senate - no, I'm not going to blame the President. I'm going to blame the Republicans and the assholes who vote for them.
Why didn't he pass immigration reform when Democrats controlled the House AND Senate? And I know this is hard for liberals to comprehend, but we don't govern by the use of opinion polls. Elections have consequences. Remember who said that?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/09/obama.immigration/
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2018
1,050
747
235
42
Milwaukee, WI
You should try exercising some civic integrity and principles. You'll find the world makes a lot more sense that way, instead of blaming everything on the black guy.
Oh, you mean like a liberal? I should go out and break some windows and block a freeway because I didn't the like the outcome of an election? No thanks. I have better things to do.
 

TekNav

Banned
Nov 27, 2018
245
162
160

ssolitare

Manbaby: The Member
Jan 12, 2009
16,368
1,567
935
Why didn't he pass immigration reform when Democrats controlled the House AND Senate? And I know this is hard for liberals to comprehend, but we don't govern by the use of opinion polls. Elections have consequences. Remember who said that?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/09/obama.immigration/
Higher priorities like the economy and healthcare. It would have been deeply unpopular.

Immigration reform was not really viable until his second term.

Plus more conservative Democrats wouldn't want it, same as your Bernie Sanders types. The 2007 bill was nice, but look at all the opposition from other Democrats.
 
Last edited:

TekNav

Banned
Nov 27, 2018
245
162
160
Higher priorities like the economy and healthcare. It would have been deeply unpopular.

Immigration reform was not really viable until his second term.
When I type in "Republicans filibuster immigration reform" in Google, I see hits from 2010, 2014 and 2018.

December 18, 2010, 11:48 AM
The failure of the bill - amid widespread opposition from Senate Republicans - is a major disappointment for Hispanic activists, who have grown increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress on immigration reform under President Obama.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dream-act-dies-in-the-senate-18-12-2010/
 

DietRob

i've been begging for over 5 years.
Dec 5, 2008
21,949
115
970
www.twitch.tv
Except Obama was president for 8 years and never attempted any of this. Amazing.
This is bullshit and you know it. Congress would not allow Obama to do anything to improve anything. Only so far Executive Orders can go. When Mitch refuses to put something on the Senate floor and Boehner refuses to do anything in the house what exactly is Obama supposed to do.

Please be specific. What exactly did you expect Obama to do?
 
Last edited:

lil puff

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,723
815
240
The meeting was an overwhelming success for Trump. They walked into a trap and ended up on camera with him when he said I will shut the government down for border security. He now controls the narrative when a shut down occurs with respect to his base who put him there for that very reason. He wasn't there to make a deal. He was there to campaign.
I do agree with this.

I don't think he comes out looking presidential or intelligent, perhaps more a conniving and calculated play to his base who will likely love a Shutdown, if it's in the name of Trump's Wall. He knows that as long as he campaigns behind his loaded whistle blowing phrases and slogans, he can do whatever he wants and his base will follow.

When he said he could stand on 5th Ave and shoot someone and his base would love it - That may have been one of the only things I've ever agreed with him on.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
3,910
2,579
415
I do agree with this.

I don't think he comes out looking presidential or intelligent, perhaps more a conniving and calculated play to his base who will likely love a Shutdown, if it's in the name of Trump's Wall. He knows that as long as he campaigns behind his loaded whistle blowing phrases and slogans, he can do whatever he wants and his base will follow.

When he said he could stand on 5th Ave and shoot someone and his base would love it - That may have been one of the only things I've ever agreed with him on.
He will never look presidential in the classical sense. His whole shtick is saying the things enough people say in private to win the electoral college. That's why I am dumbfounded that the Dems are not neutering him by agreeing to the wall, limiting chain migration, etc. They see it as giving him a win, but I see it as leaving him with nothing left to campaign on.
 

Klondyke

Banned
Dec 3, 2018
98
53
95
This is like watching one of those babies crying in a supermarket, because he's not getting he's way lol.

What a goddamn idiot, actually him and anyone who supports him is a complete tool.
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2018
1,050
747
235
42
Milwaukee, WI
Please be specific. What exactly did you expect Obama to do?
He entered his first term with Democrats controlling the House and the Senate. So save your bullshit excuses by blaming the Republicans who were elected to stop him.

And as far as his expectations, I would point to his NUMEROUS campaign promises about it.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
3,910
2,579
415
His base seems to be consistently shrinking so good luck continuing to only pander to them.
His base never existed in the first place according to the pundits now claiming it is shrinking. I agree a lot of people are not happy with lack of progress on certain issues though. But lack of progress displeasure will not become support for those who are against any progress.
 
Last edited:

PkunkFury

Member
Jun 17, 2004
3,986
480
1,345
USA
But honest question. what have the Democrats done since the 2016 election that's worthy of praise?
The democrats have not had any control at all since 2016; they've had no means of pushing their own ideas for the past two years. Now that they have the house he will see some of their policies and ideas pushed forward. Why would you expect them to have gotten a whole lot done since 2016? There's one party who should have accomplished a lot since 2016...

From my perspective, the party is rife with obstruction, identity politics, smear campaigns. open borders, and zero ideas for improving the lives of American citizens. The party doesn't speak to me and what I think is important at all. I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt because they haven't earned it.
Democrats do not want open borders (aside from some fringe). This is akin to saying Republicans want white nationalism (also a fringe position). Schumer himself, who is in this video opposing a massively expensive wall, voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (as did Hillary and Obama), and Schumer is in this video claiming that democrats are happy to continue funding strategic improvements of barriers where needed, which is exactly what Trump claims worked last year and is bragging about in the video with the data on that paper. There's a gulf of difference between funding infrastructure where needed, and throwing billions at infrastructure which will provide little return on investment, hence the "gotcha" videos you posted earlier where Obama and Hillary support fences and barriers (plural) "if necessary", like any sensible person would, as opposed to a (singular) monolithic, money sink of a "wall".

the other crap you're throwing at the dems is partisan wankery which can be and has been thrown at either party:
obstruction - Republicans were obstructionist throughout Obama's presidency, the only reason they aren't seen as obstructionist right now is because they have majorities in every branch, however, they continue to obstruct (see the fact that Trump doesn't have the votes to get his wall passed through his own House...)
identity politics - every identity politics issue that Republicans take a stance opposite the Democrats is Republicans taking an identity politics stance. Identity politics is a bipartisan strategy. The term itself is a meaningless buzzword which boils down to targeting demographics. Just because you agree with Republican identity politics stances, doesn't mean they aren't identity politics. "Make America Great Again" is identity politics. "The wall" is identity politics. "War on Christmas" is identity politics. NFL boycott is identity politics. Support for Confederate statues is identity politics. Birtherism is identity politics. Attacks on Planned Parenthood are identity politics. Anti abortion is identity politics. Farm subsidies are identity politics. This list never ends. You are daft if you think your party of choice hasn't built their strategy around identity politics.
smear campaigns - this one is laughable, Republicans have been waging a smear campaign against Hillary Clinton since the 90s, and dove even more heavily into Bill. They excel at this shit and it's a core part of their strategy. It was fun to watch them squirm for eight years as they could find absolutely nothing on Obama despite every effort
zero ideas for improving the lives of American citizens - Republicans have controlled all branches of government for two years, but, more importantly, they've controlled the House since 2010 and the senate since 2014. So where are their great ideas? They've had almost complete legislative control for the entire decade
All they've managed to do of note is provide massive tax cuts to the rich and businesses, and minimal tax cuts to citizens. And hilariously for your "lives of American citizens" crap, they ensured that the tax breaks for American citizens will expire in 2025, while tax cuts for big businesses don't expire. That's some cartoonish level villainy.
I guess they also ended net neutrality, so there's that...
Democrats and Republicans both have plenty of "ideas", your political leanings are obviously what determine whether or not those ideas are improvements...
 
Last edited:

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
He will never look presidential in the classical sense. His whole shtick is saying the things enough people say in private to win the electoral college. That's why I am dumbfounded that the Dems are not neutering him by agreeing to the wall, limiting chain migration, etc. They see it as giving him a win, but I see it as leaving him with nothing left to campaign on.
You could say something similar in the opposite direction. Republicans love to claim that Democrats want to do things in favor of immigrants and DACA folks in order to eventually gain their votes, but if the GOP were willing to collaborate on the same subject that would also improve the chances of increasing sympathy for the Republican party, which would help with them, their families and friends (which, in many cases, include people who are already U.S. citizens).

A realistic compromise would involve both sides making concessions and discussing moderate ideas. So far, we aren't seeing the Trump administration trying to close the gaps between the default positions of each side.
 
Last edited:

PkunkFury

Member
Jun 17, 2004
3,986
480
1,345
USA
Oh, you mean like a liberal? I should go out and break some windows and block a freeway because I didn't the like the outcome of an election? No thanks. I have better things to do.
Nah, best to do it like a conservative and run over someone with you car, or send bombs to every major opposition party leader and donor
See how two can play your game of demonizing and delegitimizing half the country based on the actions of some nuts? Probably best if neither side pretends these extremes are representative of the other
 
Last edited:

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
3,910
2,579
415
You could say something similar in the opposite direction. Republicans love to claim that Democrats want to do things in favor of immigrants and DACA folks in order to eventually gain their votes, but if the GOP were willing to collaborate on the same subject that would also improve the chances of increasing sympathy for the Republican party, which would help with them, their families and friends (which, in many cases, include people who are already U.S. citizens).

A realistic compromise would involve both sides making concessions and discussing moderate ideas. So far, we aren't seeing the Trump administration trying to close the gaps between the default positions of each side.
You're right and wrong. You're right that the Republicans could actually benefit from some of the DACA kids, especially in light of the religious leanings of most central American immigrants. But you're wrong on the both sides not willing to compromise. Trump has offered DACA in exchange for the wall and immigration reforms important to his base. The Dems rejected it though.
 
Jun 26, 2018
1,050
747
235
42
Milwaukee, WI
Nah, best to do it like a conservative and run over someone with you car, or send bombs to every major opposition party leader and donor
Except that you can't find ONE CONSERVATIVE that condones any of those actions. NONE. But we know PLENTY of you liberals defended BLM and the Black Bloc protesters during the inauguration.
 
Last edited:

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
Trump has offered DACA in exchange for the wall and immigration reforms important to his base. The Dems rejected it though.
I was aware of that attempt, but it began as DACA for the wall. That's what Trump had agreed to support. Then he talked with immigration hardliners behind the scenes and changed his mind.

The problem, of course, is those immigration reforms. The ones proposed by Trump were all just based on adding more restrictions, reducing the total number of legal immigrants, etc. without any flexibility for discussion about their specifics. It was "everything or nothing".
 
Last edited:

PkunkFury

Member
Jun 17, 2004
3,986
480
1,345
USA
Except that you can't find ONE CONSERVATIVE that condones any of those actions. NONE. But we know PLENTY of you liberals defended BLM and the Black Bloc protesters during the inauguration.
sure about that? Bet you I can find some people who condone those bad actions in the name of extreme right wing politics. Nevermind that I went to extremes to illustrate how silly you are being, I could just as easily have suggested occupying and trashing a wildlife refuge for weeks or any number of Planned Parenthood vandalisms, either of which may have more support than liberals doing the same

Parties are huge, support for extremist behavior on both sides is minimal. You have no more control over who labels themselves as conservative than democrats have over who labels themselves as liberal. The left does not have a monopoly on political extremism and violence and does not condone such activity more than the right, as you are claiming. Heck, democrats even raised funds to fix some of the extremist vandalism you are citing. It's senseless to paint a group of millions using the actions of a handful as your brush, particularly when the left spoke out against said actions via fundraisers. Do it to the left, and they deserve to do it to you in return
 
Last edited:

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
3,910
2,579
415
I was aware of that attempt, but it began as DACA for the wall. That's what Trump had agreed to support. Then he talked with immigration hardliners behind the scenes and changed his mind.

The problem, of course, is those immigration reforms. The ones proposed by Trump were all just based on adding more restrictions, reducing the total number of legal immigrants, etc. without any flexibility for discussion about their specifics. It was "everything or nothing".
I don't deny that Trump included a lot more in the offer than the wall, but Chuck and Nancy know how negotiations work. If they wanted to actually make a deal instead of resist him, a deal would have been done. The reason no deal was done is because Chuck, Nancy, and the rest of the elites don't really care about DACA. Everything is based on political capital to them. DACA by itself is a win so they would take it if offered clean. But any deal giving Trump something big gives them as much headache as benefit, so no deal was ever done, and negotiations barely got off the ground. Just look at our inner cities. Same thing happens. The care so much until they are re-elected, and then have tied hands until the next election cycle.

To be fair though - the R's elites have been just as bad. RHINO is not a new acronym.
 

lil puff

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,723
815
240
Except that you can't find ONE CONSERVATIVE that condones any of those actions. NONE. But we know PLENTY of you liberals defended BLM and the Black Bloc protesters during the inauguration.
Very few people, in general condoned violence from those incidents stemming from BLM protests.

Most people understood that those events were outliers, and many didn't even think they were actual BLM supports, but rather using the protests to incite outrage.

You are taking a selection of people and painting with a broad brush. This is something we all should take a step back and recognize if we doing that and rethink it.
 
Last edited:

PkunkFury

Member
Jun 17, 2004
3,986
480
1,345
USA
way to ignore everything else I posted. You are naive if you think there aren't a fringe who supports extremist activities (on either side)

Once again, I escalated to show how silly your name calling sounds. Both sides have extremists. I amended my examples to something comparable to the vandalism you cited. The wildlife occupation was very much supported, as is Planned Parenthood vandalism. And democrats raised funds to fix the Virginia vandalism, which shows they do not see extremism as a party policy

now you are moving the goal posts to protesters shutting down traffic, which, while annoying, remains civil and no longer supports your initial attempt to paint the entire left as lacking civility and integrity based on the actions of a few. We can keep going back and forth forever, but only one of is pretending extremism is monopolized by a single side, thus I think my point has been made
 
Last edited:

danielberg

Member
Jun 20, 2018
2,019
2,170
240
The wall is a money pit with little to no benefit. No one wants this thing but Trump and his NPCs who haven't considered the issue, costs, or options available on any level
"The wall is a money pit" Are you even serious you dont even believe that bullshit yourself right? What, you have yearly a 100 billion for illigales? But 5 billion is too much for national security and a wall which would prevent some of it? What you have enought for obama to hand over 150 billion to iran for nothing? But you dont have 5 billion for the wall? Get a clue dude and no again i dont believe the claim that its unpopular not with the voting group of the gop sorry.
 
Last edited:

Zangiefy360

Member
Aug 30, 2018
534
839
230
opposing a multi-billion dollar monument to white nationalist cowards (less than 40% approval)
The wall must be built. The data supports it.


Your point above is so far removed from reality that I won't even bother getting into it with you. Though I'm curious if you felt Democrats were also white nationalist cowards when they voted for the following:

 

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,606
1,811
350
Moore Park Beach
You nailed it.

It's been years since I've met a conservative who has a single civic principle behind "making liberals mad".

Fuck the national deficit. Fuck Christian values. Fuck the law and law enforcement. Fuck the military and our veterans. Fuck farmers. Fuck manufacturing. Fuck being the leaders of the free world.

They'd let Trump shit in their mouth if they thought a liberal would have to smell their breath.
Jesus christ, the crazy anger and hatred.
Calm down dude.

Do you really think this language will lead to any meaningful discussions?
Do you think anyone will want to talk to you or are you just here to scream crazy rants against people?

Look, You are not even trying to have a discussion. Please stop this crap.
 

ssolitare

Manbaby: The Member
Jan 12, 2009
16,368
1,567
935
The wall must be built. The data supports it.


Your point above is so far removed from reality that I won't even bother getting into it with you. Though I'm curious if you felt Democrats were also white nationalist cowards when they voted for the following:

The second tweet was from DACA, the first needs citations.
 

Beerman462

Member
Aug 12, 2011
8,422
137
610
I just want to make sure everyone knows that the wall will not cost just 5 Billion. There is alway delays and over runs in construction projects, especially one this big.

Also consider that walls don't last forever without maintenance. Someone will have to inspect the wall periodically and repair when necessary. That's when a 5 Billion dollar wall becomes a perpetual money pit.
 

PkunkFury

Member
Jun 17, 2004
3,986
480
1,345
USA
The people in Oregon wefe acquitted.
told you I could find someone who would defend right wing extremism ;)

Wikipedia:

Wikipedia said:
By August 2017, a dozen had pleaded guilty, and six of those had been sentenced to 1–2 years probation, some including house arrest. Seven others, including Ammon and Ryan Bundy, were tried and acquitted of all federal charges. Four more had been found guilty and were sentenced months later: Jake Ryan and Duane Ehmer each received 366 days in prison, with Ryan additionally getting three years of supervised probation. Darryl Thorn received 18 months on November 21, 2017.[31] Jason Patrick received 21 months on February 15, 2018.
Not that this matters. I did not say what they did was illegal (it was), I said it lacked civility and integrity, and was comparable to left wing vandalism (I was being generous, it was drawn out and much worse). Here's the breakdown:

Wikipedia said:
A subsequent estimate stated the cost as at least US$9 million, including US$2million spent relocating employees who had been threatened by the militants, US$2.3 million on federal law enforcement, US$1.7 million to replace damaged or stolen property and over US$3 million spent by Oregon government agencies.[250]
if you're going to be this intent on proving the left monopolizes extremism, you're going to need better sources

"The wall is a money pit" Are you even serious you dont even believe that bullshit yourself right?
yes, I'm serious. A massive physical barrier is expensive, requires upkeep and environmental work-arounds (thus money pit) and provides little benefit over existing fencing strategies. If someone can get around a fence, they can get around a wall, they'll just need to try a bit harder

What, you have yearly a 100 billion for illigales? But 5 billion is too much for national security and a wall which would prevent some of it?
What does this mean? Please show me data. I suspect you are making stuff up again. Still waiting for data that shows the wall is popular, now also need data that shows illegals cost 100 billion annually. Nevermind that said illegals are already in the country, so, no, building a wall would not eliminate that expense...

What you have enought for obama to hand over 150 billion to iran for nothing? But you dont have 5 billion for the wall?
"Are you even serious you dont even believe that bullshit yourself right?" Now you have three things to show me. Show me when Obama handed Iran 150 billion dollars (of taxpayer money, as this is what you are implying when comparing it to wall funding).

The 150 billion was Iran's money freed up by relaxing sanctions the US had imposed as a result of Iran's nuclear program (and the amount was severely inflated to make this talking point). Obviously if Iran were to stop their nuclear program, the US would relax these sanctions. Nevermind that this was always Iran's money, they just didn't have access to it.

Do you celebrate every time the bank "hands over" free money when you withdraw from your account!?!? Should Bank of America be mad that the bank keeps "handing over" their money to you!?!? I shouldn't have to explain this, it's very easy to find real data about the Iran deal online, without right wing spin

Once again, you believe something you can't prove. At a certain point, you might want to ask yourself why you believe so much that you can't prove. Aren't you worried that someone could take advantage of you in that respect?

Get a clue dude and no again i dont believe the claim that its unpopular not with the voting group of the gop sorry.
You may as well just amend this statement to "no again i dont believe in facts and data". I've already provided proof the wall is not popular. You've provided nothing. Nevermind that it hasn't even passed the Republican controlled House, i.e. more proof it's not even popular enough within the GOP.

I agree it is more popular within the GOP, I haven't stated otherwise. I have pointed out that Republican voters sour on the idea when the cost is brought up, and that Republicans need more than their base support to stay in power, hence my initial contention that the wall in unpopular with voters, not just GOP voters. But by all means, keep encouraging Trump to behave in ways that will tank his party. If this were Cortez shutting down the government for open borders, I'd be very much against it, but I'm not an NPC ;)

The wall must be built. The data supports it.


Your point above is so far removed from reality that I won't even bother getting into it with you. Though I'm curious if you felt Democrats were also white nationalist cowards when they voted for the following:

This is faulty logic. Of course barriers are affective near major cities. Nobody is arguing against that. As I explained to you prior, the Democrats are in favor of increased barriers where they are needed, and have voiced support to fund them in this very meeting. You even posted videos of Obama and Clinton supporting such barriers, and now you're posting a Tweet which reminds us that, yes, democrats are in favor of proper border security. We all want this and we have Schumer on record saying he will pass the same budget this year that resulted in the numbers you're showing off from last year! But we do not need a solid wall across the entirety of the US Mexico border. Here is the heritage foundation on the same topic:

once again, not even popular among Republicans. And note the support for barriers in low melting point areas, i.e. the areas highlighted by your Twitter post and the areas Democrats are willing to secure. That logic does not apply to the entire border

So what exactly does Trump want? Does he actually want a 30ft tall wall spanning the entire border? He used to, but is that what he is asking for now? I hear him saying "parts" in this broadcast. Which parts? Someone asks him how much more money he needs, he spins and talks about how much "under budget" he's been, then seems to pull 5 billion out of thin air. So much for your "master communicator".

If he actually dictated what he's trying to accomplish and had a proposal submitted in his House with a proper budget, we'd understand what is being proposed and we'd be able to discuss the merits and flaws and negotiate to something sensible. Instead, all we get is Trump asking for a nebulous "wall" that nobody wants based on his prior rhetoric, and he's doing it on national television rather than via legislation in some effort to make his opponents look weak on "security" when they've consistently supported increased border security. You are not supporting policy, you are supporting hyperbole
 
Last edited: