A Few Thoughts

[Abbey Marie]

We can handle immigration. We just need to win the damn election first.

Lol, a quote reminiscent of the thinking when GWB was elected. How'd that work out?

[fj1200]

No, FJ, you don't. What you need is for the Republicans to kick your lot out !!

Your DumbF*ery aside. My lot controls Congress.

Lol, a quote reminiscent of the thinking when GWB was elected. How'd that work out?

Do you see amnesty anywhere around you?

[Abbey Marie]

Your DumbF*ery aside. My lot controls Congress.



Do you see amnesty anywhere around you?

Do you see a fence?

[Drummond]

It's not a zero-sum game to me. What's the point of winning if you've given up every other conservative value to win one. You won't be able to overcome the voters who will flee a Republican party full of xenophobes.

The more I see of your contributions to this thread, the more they read like a Leftie trying to exploit division. In fact, if we ever do get into another debate about your Leftie bona fides, I think this thread may prove to be a good contributory source ... for me.

I don't believe that Trump is a figure 'giving up Conservative values', in any context. Neither, of course, do the Dems. If they did, they'd cease opposing him, and just let him get on with it, without commentary.

And yet, FJ, your own commentary continues.

I've seen comment, by the way, about Trump's idea of not only building a wall (or fence), but making the Mexicans pay for it. That seems to me to be a much-needed stance, deserving of applause !

Anyone questioning how Trump would arrange it, need only reflect on the method readily available. Payment needn't be direct, it just needs to happen. So ... is Mexico a country you trade with to any sizeable extent ? I'd have to believe it was, and is ! AND .. who needs that trade more, America, or Mexico ?

Yes, getting Mexico to pay is easy to envisage. Who else but Trump is likely to have the Conservative grit and determination to see it through ?

[Drummond]

Your DumbF*ery aside. My lot controls Congress.

Do they really ?

I'm surprised that you're not better informed.

[Perianne]

Drummond, please tell the other conservatives here what happens to your country with unlimited immigration and why immigration is the #1 issue for America.

[Abbey Marie]

What values would those be?

fj, I love ya, but really, this is all I ever see from you. I kind of envision you as an alligator lying in wait to attack the vulnerable. But here, vulnerable=any part of any post that isn't 100% iron-clad. Or, maybe to put it more professionally, it's like having our own version of a newspaper's fact-checker. There is a value in that role for sure. And it is especially helpful anytime people are claiming factual information.

But, on a message board, sometimes people are feeling excited about a topic, and don't want to research every way but Tuesday before posting about it. Sometimes, people don't want to write a thesis on the topic. And sometimes, people just want to put their feelings on paper. And there is value in that as well. It keeps things moving and lively. And even friendly at times.

So, I'm not suggesting that you should stop calling people on actual BS. But I think to be fair, it would be nice to see you post some original threads of your own. and to see you lay out your feelings in your posts, instead of just second-guessing others'.

Then we can all have a shot at second-guessing your feelings and thoughts and beliefs, too.

I'll close with your fave emoticon-

[fj1200]

Do you see a fence?

I'll take that as a no, you don't see amnesty. And we should get a fence, I don't disagree.

fj, I love ya, but really, this is all I ever see from you. I kind of envision you as an alligator lying in wait to attack the vulnerable. But here, vulnerable=any part of any post that isn't 100% iron-clad. Or, maybe to put it more professionally, it's like having our own version of a newspaper's fact-checker. There is a value in that role for sure. And it is especially helpful anytime people are claiming factual information.

But, on a message board, sometimes people are feeling excited about a topic, and don't want to research every way but Tuesday before posting about it. Sometimes, people just want to put their feelings on paper. And there is value in that as well. It keeps things moving and lively. And even friendly at times.

So, I'm not suggesting that you should stop calling people on actual BS. But I think to be fair, it would be nice to see you post some original threads of your own. and to see you lay out your feelings in your posts, instead of just second-guessing others'.

Then we can all have a shot at second-guessing your feelings and thoughts and beliefs, too.

I'll close with your fave emoticon-

I've been asking questions for seven years. Do you only have a problem with it now? People make these broad-based proclamations and then are unable/unwilling to follow up on their beliefs. If Trump really does have these conservative values he's voicing for the unvoiced then I imagine that it would be nice if his supporters could actually put them into words.

And if that's all you see then you're not really looking. Besides, Kathianne is the world's best topic poster so in the great capitalist tradition of division of labor I submit to her expertise. I await you standing up for bullypulpit in my heinous question posting of his broad-based proclamations.

[fj1200]

The more I see of your contributions to this thread, the more they read like a Leftie trying to exploit division. In fact, if we ever do get into another debate about your Leftie bona fides, I think this thread may prove to be a good contributory source ... for me.

I don't believe that Trump is a figure 'giving up Conservative values', in any context. Neither, of course, do the Dems. If they did, they'd cease opposing him, and just let him get on with it, without commentary.

You're delusional imagination aside nobody even really knows what his conservative values are, see Kathianne's thread on the subject.

And yet, FJ, your own commentary continues.

I've seen comment, by the way, about Trump's idea of not only building a wall (or fence), making the Mexicans pay for it. That seems to me to be a much-needed stance, deserving of applause !

Anyone questioning how Trump would arrange it, need only reflect on the method readily available. Payment needn't be direct, it just needs to happen. So ... is Mexico a country you trade with to any sizeable extent ? I'd have to believe it was, and is ! AND .. who needs that trade more, America, or Mexico ?

Yes, getting Mexico to pay is easy to envisage. Who else but Trump is likely to have the Conservative grit and determination to see it through ?

You're fricking delusional. Make the Mexicans pay for it!?!

Do they really ?

I'm surprised that you're not better informed.

Yeah, they're called Republicans.

Drummond, please tell the other conservatives here what happens to your country with unlimited immigration and why immigration is the #1 issue for America.

Um, we don't have unlimited immigration.

[Drummond]

Drummond, please tell the other conservatives here what happens to your country with unlimited immigration and why immigration is the #1 issue for America.

Happily !

There are two current issues regarding the cause of immigration here in the UK.

One is that the main amount of damage has already been done, courtesy of past Socialist laxity on the issue (indeed, Labour at one point tried to demonise anyone objecting to it, saying they were betraying themselves as racist for so much as thinking of objecting).

The other is that the EU's open-border policy forbids anything other than open borders between EU citizens of EU Member States. David Cameron promised stiff border controls, but he had no way of delivering on them.

Anyway .. as for practical effects, well .. one is a 'ghetto-isation' of major cities. People come in, with their standards and beliefs, but have little to no interest in integrating. Rather, they make pocket 'clone' communities of the type that they prefer to see.

Labour, in exercising their 'racism' imperative, bent over backwards to accommodate them, saying this was 'multiculturalism' (their particular version) in action, of a type we should be proud of. So, social services bent to their needs, seemingly interminably. Whole administrative tiers opened up to work with that in mind. And, of course, our benefits system was made ever-more attractive to them, over a period of years.

This is why so many illegals are massing on the French side of the Eurotunnel, determined not to quit until they reach Britain - also why it's a recurring problem that just will not go away. They cling on to the belief that British streets are paved with gold. Ever-more numbers of people, in their many thousands, want an easier life, paid for by the State. It's creating chaos for both England and France. People have died trying to cross the Channel.

The more State machinery pays for them, so the greater the expectation is that it continues .. no matter how many people are involved.

We have the likes of Choudary, trying to declare 'Sharia-controlled zones' where the local Muslim population is high. We have London schools, coping with children speaking THREE HUNDRED languages, between them. We have social services creaking under the strain. Housing needs having to cater for the numbers arriving. Communities where you'd be hard-pressed to hear English spoken (I found that a lot, on London buses, especially in the Socialist paradise of Tottenham).

We have indigenous businesses that fail, because ethnically-run and ethnically owned ones better cater to immigrant needs.

There's one notable exception, relatively speaking. It's all good for the building trade. There's always a demand for Mosque-building, for example ...

Cameron is passing new laws designed to deter people from thinking they'll get an easy ride of it, but as I've said, the damage is done. Even IF we could close our borders tomorrow, the existing pocket communities will still grow. Demanding deference to THEM.

We have a London Mayor who needs Muslim votes, so needs to defer to them, because the balance of voting power, in London, now resides with them.

Unrestrained immigration is an excellent way to murder a culture, and cripple prosperity, since so much of it has to be channelled, via taxation, into benefits and building an infrastructure to cope.And of course, there are manpower needs associated with trying. Enter outfits like the NHS, recruiting from all parts of the world, to cater for those needing treatment. Some will have paid for treatment, over many years, through taxation. Some will not.

Perianne, hope this lot helps !

[Drummond]

1. You're delusional imagination aside nobody even really knows what his conservative values are, see Kathianne's thread on the subject.

2. You're fricking delusional. Make the Mexicans pay for it!?!

Curious, that. You deny knowledge of his Conservative values, then continue on by addressing one of his expressions of them !

And you hate the idea of Mexixco paying for a fence, FJ ? 'Enlighten' me, is this an Obama position ?

Yeah, they're called Republicans.

No, I'm sure the Republicans are very informed about who controls Congress (after all, they SHOULD be). My point was that YOU seemed not to be.

Please keep up, FJ ..

Um, we don't have unlimited immigration.

Does Obama regret that ?

Please advise.

[fj1200]

Curious, that. You deny knowledge of his Conservative values, then continue on by addressing one of his expressions of them !

And you hate the idea of Mexixco paying for a fence, FJ ? 'Enlighten' me, is this an Obama position ?

Any idiot can have a conservative position. You even think you have a couple. Good luck getting Mexico to pay for a fence.

No, I'm sure the Republicans are very informed about who controls Congress (after all, they SHOULD be). My point was that YOU seemed not to be.

Please keep up, FJ ..

Have you pretty much given up on any rational discussion and are in full admission of being a troll?

Does Obama regret that ?

Please advise.

WTF is wrong with you?

[Drummond]

fj, I love ya, but really, this is all I ever see from you. I kind of envision you as an alligator lying in wait to attack the vulnerable. But here, vulnerable=any part of any post that isn't 100% iron-clad. Or, maybe to put it more professionally, it's like having our own version of a newspaper's fact-checker. There is a value in that role for sure. And it is especially helpful anytime people are claiming factual information.

But, on a message board, sometimes people are feeling excited about a topic, and don't want to research every way but Tuesday before posting about it. Sometimes, people don't want to write a thesis on the topic. And sometimes, people just want to put their feelings on paper. And there is value in that as well. It keeps things moving and lively. And even friendly at times.

So, I'm not suggesting that you should stop calling people on actual BS. But I think to be fair, it would be nice to see you post some original threads of your own. and to see you lay out your feelings in your posts, instead of just second-guessing others'.

Then we can all have a shot at second-guessing your feelings and thoughts and beliefs, too.

I'll close with your fave emoticon-

I for one would welcome that. The result could be most instructive.

[Drummond]

Any idiot can have a conservative position. You even think you have a couple. Good luck getting Mexico to pay for a fence.

I thought I'd covered that ? Tell me, does Mexico trade with the US ? And do they need that trade, more than you do ? Do you see NO latitude for remedial adjustment ?

Have you pretty much given up on any rational discussion and are in full admission of being a troll?

Not at all. I'd always defer to experts at such things ... were I ever inclined to indulge, that is.

Do you charge reasonable rates ?

WTF is wrong with you?

Not a thing.

... you ?

Now, do you have an answer for me, regarding what I'd asked ? Not least to satisfy the demands of reasonable, rational discussion, FJ ...

[gabosaurus]

To clarify, if this rift does cause a 3rd party rise, the left wing of the Democrat party is going to remain in office for several cycles, barring something catastrophic.

I have been telling you this all along. The more radical right-wing faction holds this absurd notion that somehow Trump is going to win over mainstream American voters. Which is not possible. At the most, Trump appeals to 20 percent of voters.
Anyone who champions Trump into the 2016 election cycle needs to realize that his candidacy, whether on a GOP or independent ballot, pretty much guarantees that the Dem candidate will win. If it is Hillary Clinton, then you get eight years of Clinton.
If Trump runs as the GOP candidate, not only will he loses, but he will take down quite a few conservative House and Senate members with him.

Want to see Hillary Clinton in the White House with Dem House and Senate? Keep supporting Trump.