The Fourth Republican Debate

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
42

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
The only two people on stage that actually answer questions are Cruz and Paul. The rest find a way to make their scripted statement.

Kasich needs to go away. I don’t care how many times he tells me his father was a mailman, I still don’t care.

The more I see of Rubio, the clearer it is that he is not the best candidate. Gang of eight will haunt him (it should) and he seems to have no problem with corporate welfare for his friends. [/quote]

I’m tending the same direction. I’d take Rubio if that’s what we were left with but I’ve liked Cruz for years and have seen little that would separate him and me. I watched his post debate interview and his primary election strategy seemed sound. I’m not as willing to dismiss his chances as I used to be.

He is without doubt the sharpest knife in the drawer.[/quote]

Rubio seems to me like an “Obama Lite” , really good looks, no experience at anything but being a politician. I am a Republican but, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with most here. I don’t like any of them. Cruz is the closest on most issues, but, I feel his ability be be elected in a general election is zero. Christ, what a fucking mess.

43

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
something like 3.5 million illegals self-deported simply because the law was enforced.
[/quote]

0% chance this happens. These people will become indignant and make the civil unrest in ferguson seem tame. [/quote]

I disagree. I think most are here for work and send the money home. When the money dries up, they leave.[/quote]

Isn’t this the free market at work? I haven’t thought much on this side of the issue, but it’s worth some considering. Isn’t the most free market one where employers the choice to bid for the most desperate of workers to accept the lowest possible wage?

So why not get rid of the “illegal” immigrant status and let them come and work? Any interference is a less free market. And I’m told interference is a bad thing.

Just a quick thought…[/quote]

The demand for cheap labor has and will always exist, it doesn’t mean we accommodate them. You now see tradesmen who spent years in an apprenticeship or as journeymen being undercut by people who can evade the Border Patrol.

[/quote]

WRONG.

44

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:
What’s everyone’s opinion on the ‘Trump deportation’ debate?

I agree with Kasich who said “Come on, folks. We all know you can’t pick them up and ship them back across the border. It’s a silly argument. It is not an adult argument. It makes no sense”. Trump responded by saying Dwight Eisenhower moved 1.5 million out, “We have no choice”. Bush chimed in saying Clinton is doing high-fives hearing this.

I do not think it is reasonable to claim you can deport 11 million people and have that be a positive thing. Who agrees with Trump? Can you explain how it would be possible?[/quote]

Make it mandatory for employers to check legal status of all employees and keep the record of citizenship on file – right now the law is a joke and basically punishes employers for checking legality.

Make it a federal crime to knowingly employ an illegal and whoever checks the paperwork (or was supposed to) goes to prison if they fail to do their job.

There will be massive self-deportation.[/quote]

I agree. Simultaneously, welfare benefits must only be provided after legality has been established.

If no work and no welfare is the result they won’t need immigration officers rounding them up. If I’m wrong what am I missing?
[/quote]

Is that what Trump is proposing when he says he will deport all illegals? Honest question, because I read it differently. Aren’t most/all the candidates for E-verify systems to check legal status for employment?[/quote]

I know he implied physical, forced deportations – kinda like most if not practically all countries do – but what Ruff and I said sure would seem to do the trick. What do you think? [/quote]

I do not think physical forced deportations is possible, but it is also the wrong thing to do. I think Carson actually had one of the best immigration stances when he voiced his opinion the morning after the debate. Ben Carson just became arguably the most liberal candidate in the GOP race on immigration - Vox

It would allow current illegals to have a ‘guest worker’ status and would prevent the harm to industries that currently rely on cheap labor.

Without getting into the right/wrong of deportation, how would it be possible? When Eisenhower did it the workers were all living in camps, so it was easy to perform “Operation Wetback”, which was stopped because it was a terrible idea. 1/3 of illegals have homes, most have children that are US citizens, plenty have jobs (it would hurt the employer/industry), and the process of moving 11 million people is not simple. Do you bus them out? Fly them out? Knock on people’s door and ask for their papers? How do you round them up? I do not think it is a practical argument.

As far as the wall. I agree it would assist in stopping Central American illegals from walking across the border. However, it does nothing to stop the 40% of illegals that are visa overstays. It does nothing to stop immigration from non-Central America countries. Not all immigrants are walking across the Mexico-USA border, so the plan to stop illegal immigration needs to acknowledge that.

45

Great stuff in here, I’ve already learned so much.

I read about illegals with forged papers working on drill crews and said to myself, “No way that happens in the coal mines! The Unions would never allow it!” FALSE!

In reality, Unions don’t care if illegals work in the mines, as long as they join the Union! It’s making my head spin.

Everybody makes money off these people. Consumers, suppliers, politicians, criminals, police, unions, employers. Keeping them here, but illegal is like some kind of indentured servitude labor program.

46

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
I would generally expect more smoke in mirrors as they try to hide the fact that they are essentially pushing agendas that benefit corporations at the expense of the public. More rationalizing the intellectualization of greed.[/quote]

You are confusing the Republicans debate with the Democrats.

The Democrats push cronie capitalism to make their giant corporate donors rich via government money, and do an amazing job (for a bunch of old white millionaires) of convincing the easily led that they are for the common people.

47

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
something like 3.5 million illegals self-deported simply because the law was enforced.
[/quote]

0% chance this happens. These people will become indignant and make the civil unrest in ferguson seem tame. [/quote]

I disagree. I think most are here for work and send the money home. When the money dries up, they leave.[/quote]

Isn’t this the free market at work? I haven’t thought much on this side of the issue, but it’s worth some considering. Isn’t the most free market one where employers are allowed to bid for the most desperate of workers to accept the lowest possible wage?

So why not get rid of the “illegal” immigrant status and let them come and work? Any interference is a less free market. And I’m told interference is a bad thing.

Just a quick thought…[/quote]

Little to quick of a thought, I think. Your proposal would harm low-wage Americans, who are not participating in the work place because they are squeezed out by immigrants — who are also illegal.

We have too many entry level workers for too few entry-level jobs.

If we want to raise people out of poverty, they need work.

It’s time to take care of our own for a while.

The black community, in particular, is being turned into a permanent underclass by immigration. They have no way to enter the workforce.

48

[quote]idaho wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
The only two people on stage that actually answer questions are Cruz and Paul. The rest find a way to make their scripted statement.

Kasich needs to go away. I don’t care how many times he tells me his father was a mailman, I still don’t care.

The more I see of Rubio, the clearer it is that he is not the best candidate. Gang of eight will haunt him (it should) and he seems to have no problem with corporate welfare for his friends. [/quote]

I’m tending the same direction. I’d take Rubio if that’s what we were left with but I’ve liked Cruz for years and have seen little that would separate him and me. I watched his post debate interview and his primary election strategy seemed sound. I’m not as willing to dismiss his chances as I used to be.

He is without doubt the sharpest knife in the drawer.[/quote]

Rubio seems to me like an “Obama Lite” , really good looks, no experience at anything but being a politician. I am a Republican but, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with most here. I don’t like any of them. Cruz is the closest on most issues, but, I feel his ability be be elected in a general election is zero. Christ, what a fucking mess.
[/quote]

You might want to look at the head-to-head polls. Cruz beats Hillary.

49

Does this count as an example of “Institutional Racism?”

50

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]idaho wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
The only two people on stage that actually answer questions are Cruz and Paul. The rest find a way to make their scripted statement.

Kasich needs to go away. I don’t care how many times he tells me his father was a mailman, I still don’t care.

The more I see of Rubio, the clearer it is that he is not the best candidate. Gang of eight will haunt him (it should) and he seems to have no problem with corporate welfare for his friends. [/quote]

I’m tending the same direction. I’d take Rubio if that’s what we were left with but I’ve liked Cruz for years and have seen little that would separate him and me. I watched his post debate interview and his primary election strategy seemed sound. I’m not as willing to dismiss his chances as I used to be.

He is without doubt the sharpest knife in the drawer.[/quote]

Rubio seems to me like an “Obama Lite” , really good looks, no experience at anything but being a politician. I am a Republican but, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with most here. I don’t like any of them. Cruz is the closest on most issues, but, I feel his ability be be elected in a general election is zero. Christ, what a fucking mess.
[/quote]

You might want to look at the head-to-head polls. Cruz beats Hillary.[/quote]

As much as I would like to believe that it just isn’t so.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_cruz_vs_clinton-4034.html

He does beat her in one of the five or so polls quoted. But loses to her in all of the others.

51

[quote]idaho wrote

Rubio seems to me like an “Obama Lite” , really good looks, no experience at anything but being a politician. I am a Republican but, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with most here. I don’t like any of them. Cruz is the closest on most issues, but, I feel his ability be be elected in a general election is zero. Christ, what a fucking mess.
[/quote]

I agree all have some shortcomings. Rubio not voting and whining how “he won’t be running for Senate again since there is ‘gridlock’ and nothing get done anyway” Grrrrrrrr Get a pair.
However I feel any of the group would be miles ahead of any Dems regarding attempting to fundamentally change society through both direct actions (indifference to traditional allies, asinine department appointments, pushing total government takeover) and indirect action of stocking judicial with the most flaming left wing fucknuts in the society.

52

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
The only two people on stage that actually answer questions are Cruz and Paul. The rest find a way to make their scripted statement.

Kasich needs to go away. I don’t care how many times he tells me his father was a mailman, I still don’t care.

The more I see of Rubio, the clearer it is that he is not the best candidate. Gang of eight will haunt him (it should) and he seems to have no problem with corporate welfare for his friends. [/quote]

Rubio is doing the bidding of American Sugar Corp/US Sugar (whose owners are, by far, his biggest donors and bundles).

The American Sugar/US Sugar owners are dependent on the slavery-lite labor force of illegals to work the sugar plantations — and they literally house in the same shacks their predecessors-in-interest (and sometimes by blood descent) housed slaves.

Permitting illegal immigration is neither kind, nor compassionate.

It makes the worst of the rich get richer and keeps the poor poor.

Note, however, that the elites of both parties like slavery-lite and coat their lies with sugar to make them go down easily.

Tells you a bit about who the insiders really are.

53

Is there anywhere to find out what corporations back which candidates? I’m not a huge Trump fan, but i love the fact he’s self financed.

54

[quote]Aggv wrote:
Is there anywhere to find out what corporations back which candidates? I’m not a huge Trump fan, but i love the fact he’s self financed. [/quote]

Kind of. It lags. The direct contributions are online, and then you sort by employer/affiliation.

PACS are more difficult.

And the information lags depending on how forthcoming the candidate. For example, Cruz you find out in a couple of weeks. Clinton takes six months.

55

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Clinton takes six months.[/quote]

Probably takes longer to get clearance from governments back over to the foreign ambassadors in DC…

56

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Rubio is doing the bidding of American Sugar Corp/US Sugar (whose owners are, by far, his biggest donors and bundles).

[/quote]

Bingo. Just like the rest of the establishment cronies. They talk a good game but want special treatment for their interests (see oil, corn, etc.) We scream about the Democrats pissing away money on welfare, but the Republicans do the same thing just at the corporate level.

57

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Rubio is doing the bidding of American Sugar Corp/US Sugar (whose owners are, by far, his biggest donors and bundles).

[/quote]

Bingo. Just like the rest of the establishment cronies. They talk a good game but want special treatment for their interests (see oil, corn, etc.) We scream about the Democrats pissing away money on welfare, but the Republicans do the same thing just at the corporate level.

[/quote]

Oh the Democrats do it at the corporate level, too. Just different corporations.

58

[quote]treco wrote:

[quote]idaho wrote

Rubio seems to me like an “Obama Lite” , really good looks, no experience at anything but being a politician. I am a Republican but, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with most here. I don’t like any of them. Cruz is the closest on most issues, but, I feel his ability be be elected in a general election is zero. Christ, what a fucking mess.
[/quote]

I agree all have some shortcomings. Rubio not voting and whining how “he won’t be running for Senate again since there is ‘gridlock’ and nothing get done anyway” Grrrrrrrr Get a pair.
However I feel any of the group would be miles ahead of any Dems regarding attempting to fundamentally change society through both direct actions (indifference to traditional allies, asinine department appointments, pushing total government takeover) and indirect action of stocking judicial with the most flaming left wing fucknuts in the society.[/quote]

Well said.

59

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

Oh the Democrats do it at the corporate level, too. Just different corporations.[/quote]

I would never argue that fact. Tech and “green” industries are more than juiced up by tax payer money.

60

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

Oh the Democrats do it at the corporate level, too. Just different corporations.[/quote]

I would never argue that fact. Tech and “green” industries are more than juiced up by tax payer money. [/quote]

It’s not even just the “cool” industries like that. Pelosi (D) made it so tuna canneries in certain jurisdictions can use illegal workers. Of course, her husband happens to own tuna canneries in those certain jurisdictions.

Reid (D) funneled so much money to certain goombas in the construction business that he became an unindicted co-conspirator in mob investigations.

John Boehner (R) did the same.

The elite of both parties are complete fuckers and 100% in bed with one another. That’s why they hate people like Cruz (R) and Sanders (D). They are not part of the elite club.