How can we contact Trump to enlighten him?

Thinking of those people as "low level voters" is why the Democrats lost the support of working class voters.

If those people think there will be a wall, and that a wall would do any good, then the Republican party is where they belong.. They buy Trump lies.
 
You cannot enlighten Trump. He is incompetent and has a bad brain. here is him kind of, sort of talking about Jared yesterday. Damn he rambles all over, unable to answer a simple question about clearances.
This should give you the chills.
 
If those people think there will be a wall, and that a wall would do any good, then the Republican party is where they belong.. They buy Trump lies.

True. And those people who thought Hillary was going to give them a free college tuition or increase the federal minimum wage were just as foolish. Yet, fools on both sides were naive enough to believe them.

But, you missed my point. When one side becomes denigrating and feel they are intellectually and morally superior to the other side is not going to make any friends. From 1932 the Democratic coalition relied heavily on American working class voters until they drove them away with condescending smirks. I watched this happen with white Southern voters but it obviously spread to swing states in 2016.
 
Quote Originally Posted by sear
"How can we contact Trump to enlighten him on issues where he's clearly askew?"

"Respond to one of his tweets, duh." OODA
Count me a skeptic.

I refuse to have a smart-phone. I'm not a technophobe. But I understood how addictive they'd be, how they'd change lives & life-styles before the experts started sounding the alarm about it.

I don't do Faceplant, or Buttpage, or any of that. If I'd like insight into how others react, I obtain it in fora like these.

<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>

Trump may tweet a lot. I very seriously doubt he reads as many tweets from unknown sources as he sends.

- You're right. One could respond to a Trump tweet.

- I doubt he'd ever see it. And even if he did, I doubt he'd respond, or substantially revise major current administration policy.
 
I can't post a link because I heard it on radio. But I heard Obama deported more illegal aliens than any other U.S. president before him.

Beware your bias confirmation. It's particularly distracting for unflinching partisans like you.
those numbers include illegals stopped at the border
 
Walls are 19th Century thinking, unless you intend to station the US Army on the Wall it is useless

At best, the Federal and State Gov't own thirty percent of the land where this wall would go, meaning if they intended to make it inclusive the Court fights would extend for over a decade

And the point you are missing is that the President promised endlessly that the Wall was going up day one and Mexico was paying for it



India and Pakistan: The two nuclear powers, with 1.5 billion people between them, have fought four wars since 1947, and continue to face each other down in Kashmir, a territory both countries dispute. In order to prevent Pakistani terrorists from striking inside India, the Indian government built a series of fences and walls to keep Pakistani terrorists at bay. Had it not, it is quite possible that the two countries might be at war right now.

Morocco and Algeria: Morocco built a 1,700-mile system of berms, fences, and ditches to stop the Polisario Front, an Algerian-sponsored terrorist group, from infiltrating the Western Sahara. It took seven years to build, but the result was so effective that Algeria agreed to a cease-fire, ending the Western Sahara war that had raged since 1975.

Israel and the West Bank: The Israeli border wall — well, actually more of a fence in most places — remains hugely controversial because many journalists and United Nations officials condemn anything Israel does, no matter how much precedent exists outside Israel. But, Israel’s fence reduced terror attacks by more than 90 percent, something decades of diplomacy failed to do.

Cyprus: The irony of so many United Nations officials condemning Israel or Trump’s demands for a wall is that the United Nations itself built a wall dividing Cyprus in order to separate Turkish and Greek combatants. While Cyprus remains divided, the wall ended the fighting.

Northern Ireland: Against the backdrop of a decades-long terror campaign by the Irish Republican Army and Unionist violence, the British and government of Northern Ireland built several so-called “Peace Lines,” fences and walls up to 25 feet tall and sometimes running for miles to separate Protestant and Catholic neighborhoods.

Saudi Arabia and Yemen: While the Iranian-backed Houthi militia has launched missiles at Riyadh, why hasn’t it sent terrorists to conduct hit-and-run attacks in Saudi Arabia? The answer is easy. After a series of Yemeni attacks in the late 1990s, Saudi Arabia demarcated the border and built a 1,100-mile border wall.

Saudi Arabia and Iraq: After the Islamic State steamrolled through northern Iraq, Saudi Arabia scrambled to build a 600-mile border fence and ditch system stretching from Jordan to Kuwait. It worked.

Turkey and Syria: During the 1990s, the Syrian government supported the Kurdish insurgency inside Turkey. Turkey responded by reinforcing its border with fences and minefields. The result? Fifteen years of quiet. It was only after Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan cleared many of the mines and loosened restrictions that security declined in both countries. Today, as a result, Turkey is building a new, fortified wall stretching more than 500 miles.

Kenya and Somalia: Over the last two years, Kenya has made good on its promise to build a barrier along its 440-mile border. It may not look like much — as between Israel and the West Bank, it is more barbed wire fence than concrete wall — but Kenyan authorities have said it has reduced infiltrations by Somali terrorists.

Of course, not all countries utilize walls for security. Many others use walls and border fences to prevent illegal immigration.

India and Bangladesh: Beginning in the 1980s, India began construction on almost 1,800 miles along its border with its neighbor. While India justifies the fence in its efforts to curb illegal immigration, they have also cut down cross-border crime.

Spain and Morocco: Spain has long maintained two enclaves — Ceuta and Melilla — on the Morocco side of the Strait of Gibraltar. Both are surrounded by high fences to keep African migrants out of Spain and therefore the European Union.

Greece and Turkey: The land border between the two countries is little more than 100 miles, but this is marked by barbed wire fences and, in places, minefields. While the mines are a vestige of military conflicts between the two countries, the European Union has been fine with them remaining to deter illegal immigration from the Middle East into Europe.

Hungary and Serbia, Croatia: Hungary isn’t shy about justifying its border fence in its desire to prevent illegal immigration by those originating outside of Europe. Greece’s land border may be well-defended, but African and Middle Eastern migrants simply make the first leg of their journey by sea, before moving north through the Balkans. Other European states might tolerate such a flow; Hungary sees no need. After all, migrants and asylum-seekers are supposed to remain in their first country of entry, which land-locked Hungary never would be.

Just because other countries have invested in walls and fences, of course, does not necessarily make them a panacea. But as debates in Congress once again turn toward immigration and the status of illegal (or, in politically correct parlance, “undocumented”) aliens, critics of the border wall are more uninformed than the president they dispute if they believe Trump’s proposal is inconsistent with international norms.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/t...e-in-other-parts-of-the-world/article/2646819

*also Tunisia and Libya since Libya terrorism crosses the Sahel (AQIM) and Tunisia in particular*
 
“As the Majority’s memorandum stated, the FISA judge was never informed that Hillary Clinton and the DNC funded the dossier that was a basis for the Department of Justice’s FISA application,” Sanders said in a statement.
“In addition, the Minority’s memo fails to even address the fact that the Deputy FBI Director told the Committee that had it not been for the dossier, no surveillance order would have been sought,” the press secretary added.

And wrong again. The rebuttal memo came out showing that the Dossier was not germane to the FISA court. The Dossier came out after the warrant was approved. But on Fox, it was going to come out, so it must have been what the warrant was predicated on. You just have to click your heels together and say "I believe". and yes, the dossier was originally financed by republicans. Did they forget to tell the court that too?
 
True. And those people who thought Hillary was going to give them a free college tuition or increase the federal minimum wage were just as foolish. Yet, fools on both sides were naive enough to believe them.

But, you missed my point. When one side becomes denigrating and feel they are intellectually and morally superior to the other side is not going to make any friends. From 1932 the Democratic coalition relied heavily on American working class voters until they drove them away with condescending smirks. I watched this happen with white Southern voters but it obviously spread to swing states in 2016.

Nope. The min wage has been elevated by many states without national government bill. Even some cities have raised theirs. Oddly enough, those states are having the best economies.
 
Quote Originally Posted by sear
I can't post a link because I heard it on radio. But I heard Obama deported more illegal aliens than any other U.S. president before him.
Beware your bias confirmation. It's particularly distracting for unflinching partisans like you.

"those numbers include illegals stopped at the border" a #28
I'm not surprised. Good for Obama, and U.S. for that matter.

BUT !!

In light of the current DACA kerfuffle it does raise questions about what all the fuss is about.
 
Nope. The min wage has been elevated by many states without national government bill. Even some cities have raised theirs. Oddly enough, those states are having the best economies.

We were talking about Clinton's campaign promise. The president has nothing to do with states raising their minimum wage.

States have often been more progressive than the federal government: providing attorneys for the accused, minimum wage, legalization of marijuana, health care, gay marriage, prison reform.........
 
How can we contact Trump to enlighten him on issues where he's clearly askew?

Candidate Trump PROMISED he'd build a wall, and that Mexico would pay for it.
Mexico isn't going to pay for it.

But instead of acknowledging his own failure, Trump appears to bull his way forward with a multi-$Billion project, and stick the U.S. tax payers with the bill.

So what?

Those that have worked on U.S. / Mexico border security have already acknowledged, a physical barrier is not a panacea. Steel U.S. border wall has already had holes hacked through it large enough to drive a truck through.
The holes, tunnels, & other breaches used by illegal immigrants are more numerous.

BUT !!

Instead of a literal wall, suppose the allocated $money were spent on surveillance & detection equipment?
Such 3rd millennium solutions might be ideal for the wide open spaces at issue for much of the as yet unfortified border.

If Trump was so versatile on the funding source for his n'er-do-wall, shouldn't he be equally versatile about the design? Even at the risk of saving the U.S. $tax $payer $Billions?

Don't waste your time. Trump doesn't read or listen.
 
How can we contact Trump to enlighten him on issues where he's clearly askew?

Candidate Trump PROMISED he'd build a wall, and that Mexico would pay for it.
Mexico isn't going to pay for it.

But instead of acknowledging his own failure, Trump appears to bull his way forward with a multi-$Billion project, and stick the U.S. tax payers with the bill.

So what?

Those that have worked on U.S. / Mexico border security have already acknowledged, a physical barrier is not a panacea. Steel U.S. border wall has already had holes hacked through it large enough to drive a truck through.
The holes, tunnels, & other breaches used by illegal immigrants are more numerous.

BUT !!

Instead of a literal wall, suppose the allocated $money were spent on surveillance & detection equipment?
Such 3rd millennium solutions might be ideal for the wide open spaces at issue for much of the as yet unfortified border.

If Trump was so versatile on the funding source for his n'er-do-wall, shouldn't he be equally versatile about the design? Even at the risk of saving the U.S. $tax $payer $Billions?

20mw3g.jpg
 
Back
Top