The Real timschochet

Usually when I have 3 I’m all in. But I’m a lousy gambler.

1. It’s irrelevant to Tom Homan because he wants them all deported anyway, violent or not. 2. it’s irrelevant to me because I believe I can look at an individual situation and say “yeah that’s a bad guy; he deserves to go” with a certain amount of ease, But by asking it you avoid the central point which is: whatever your definition of violent criminal, or serious criminal, or bad person, or whatever term you wish to use, we should all be able to agree on one thing: the vast majority of undocumented immigrants do not fit that description. What then is to become of them? Tom Homan wants them rounded up and sent away. @Strike seems to agree with this (at least he doesn’t disagree). What do you think should happen to them? Please answer, as I tried my best to answer you.

I guess because I don’t understand why you would have such an unreasonable, inhumane attitude. I honestly don’t. Earlier you accused me of calling you racist but I didn’t. I don’t believe you are and therefore I find your position on this unjustifiable. Racists can have this position and I get that. But you don’t have that excuse.

Then deport them. And let the rest find a way to stay. Does anyone oppose this idea?

Fair enough. Let’s simplify this. I don’t really want to get bogged down into a discussion of what is or what is not a “serious crime.” To paraphrase a late Supreme Court justice, I know it when ai see it. I don’t believe undocumented immigrants who are not guilty of serious crimes should be deported. That does not make us a country without borders. I am not in favor of that. I am, however, in favor of much more open immigration, but that is besides the point of what to do with the millions of undocumented people already here. Most of them are not serious criminals. Therefore I believe most of them should stay.

Wow, I never heard of this dude before and hopefully I never will again. Damn what a moron.

I’m sorry but what you wrote betrays a complete ignorance of history. Almost none of the immigrants who came here at the turn of the 20th century, from Eastern and central Europe, Italy, China, Japan, etc. settled in “the woods”; they huddled in the big cities: New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, etc. These were Emma Lazarus’ “huddled masses”. Their presence created overcrowding, ghettoes, crime, and they were complained about then as much as our immigrants are now, if not more so. Public education was mandatory by then. There are plenty of books about this. You needn’t stay ignorant.

I think you’re being a little facetious here. In the past I have encountered many in the MAGA movement who refuse to make any distinctions at all. There are several people here who have argued that if a person breaks the law coming here they are a criminal, and they don’t distinguish between violent rapists and some guy looking for work at Home Depot. Tom Homan seems to believe this. I do not.

My remark about racism wasn’t a comment, it was a question. Let’s put aside your use of the word “criminal”. You and I agree that actual criminals shouldn’t be here. But undocumented people who haven’t committed violent felonies, who work in our agriculture and service industries and restaurants and car washes: do you regard these as criminals as well? If you do, fine, we’ll just disagree and there’s nothing more to be said. But if you don’t regard them as criminals then what is to be gained by their being deported?

And if it WAS true that would be even worse. I don’t want hard working people to self deport. Why would anyone want this, unless you are yourself a racist? If these people leave our prices go up and we become poorer as a nation. There would be no good result here.

It’s not winning because none of it is true. The Center for Immigration Studies is a white nationalist group, like its parent, FAIR. These are racists with the goal of eliminating all non-European immigration to this country. Everything they put out is either an absolute lie or otherwise misleading. In this case it’s likely both.

1. No, but allowing nonviolent undocumented workers to stay here brings more money into social services than goes out. I keep trying to point this out and have provided numerous studies to show this is true. 2. I actually agree with you about his green restrictions. Nonetheless we’re going to have to find alternatives to oil and coal. I’ve heard Newsom talk about this; he is open to nuclear energy investment, which is more than most Democratic or current Republican politicians. 3. Importing or producing oil has no effect on the price which is controlled by the global marketplace. This is true of almost all global commodities and it’s why Trump’s “America First” ideas are so silly. 4. Your third paragraph is right. A lot of those proposals won’t go through. But let’s look at what will: he’s for lower tarrifs and free trade. Just based on that alone, if Newsom becomes President YOU will be more prosperous, with more spending power. Your life will improve. 5. He doesn’t threaten democracy. Quite the opposite. He stands up for it as he did last weekend. Do you really want people arrested without due process? You want hard working people dragged away and imprisoned because they don’t have proper papers? It’s unAmerican. Most people don’t want this. Look I get that some of my ideas are extreme and I’m not asking you to agree. But Newsom would overall be a centrist, a return to sanity and level headed governance. I’m not going to like everything he does but at this point it’s all hands on deck. We need another Reagan. Newsom’s the closest. Someone else might emerge and I’ll be for that if it happens. But I’ll also be content with this.

I am uh…not too fond of this comparison. In any event: my support for Newsom or any other candidate is not based on my personal advantage.

The issues you’re concerned about will have nothing to do with his presidency should he run and get elected. Mainly he will be pre-occupied with undoing the damage Trump has done both domestically and internationally. Putting all else aide, on the four key issues of trade, immigration, energy and globalism (foreign policy and anti-isolationism) he will be a tremendous improvement.

To a certain extent I agree with this. Protests mean little unless they translate into electoral results. On the other hand, a general rule is that large protests against an administration often DO result in a wave election next time around. That happened in 2010; the Tea Party protests led to Obama having to face a Republican majority that blocked his legislation. Which is why I made the comparison.

I could go for this. Many times I’ve noticed that you and I get into the weeds of issues we are able to find some common ground. It’s only when we are discussing the broader strokes that we sharply disagree. Perhaps this indicates where most people in this country are at underneath the rhetoric, I’d like to think so anyhow.

Better yet: why not just allow anyone who hasn’t committed a violent felony to stay here and get a green card? Have them pay a fine for coming into the country illegally but let them stay. End this mass deportation nonsense and concentrate on deporting the bad guys. What is wrong with that?

Well you do write a lot of nonsense so it can be hard to wade through.

No need to stick my fingers in my ears. I can face reality just fine. Can you?

That’s what it read to me, it sounded like you believed that Iran if invaded would fold as easily as Iraq did.

Not ignoring it. It’s ugly and awful and will create more drama. But it’s mostly for show while the pullback is not. As most of us liberals have said from the beginning: we don’t have a problem with deporting violent criminals. We don’t want them here either. We do have a problem with deporting hard working people whose only crime is the method they arrived here. You guys want that to happen; we don’t. So when Trump pulls back from that we are happy and relieved.

You’re not this naive.

I will. I’m happy Trump isn’t serious about this stuff. I very much applaud Taco Trump whenever he appears on the scene.

Both Taco and No Kings will last for a while. Count on that.

Much like the guy who started this thread, I’m pretty sure that Trump figured sending the National Guard and the Marines to Los Angeles would be a sure winner for him in the polls. I would have thought so as well, but it turns out that the public is smarter than I thought: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-immigration-2085189 His numbers are plunging. This is great news.