Mass Deportation

[5-Points 3,387]

8 minutes ago, purdygood said:

I live in CA too! Congrats on living in the best place on Earth!

OK. So do you think the people in LA and the people in Bakersfield have a lot in common? Or do the people in Silicon Valley share the same needs and concerns as do the people in the Central Valley? Do you think the people in Redding have the same political beliefs as the people in Santa Barbara? 

 

The people in Bakersfield, the Central Valley and Redding are forced to live by the votes of the people in LA, Silicon Valley and Santa Barbara even though they have nothing in common and have completely different needs. Why would you want to do that to the rest of the country? 

[purdygood 333]

12 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

OK. So do you think the people in LA and the people in Bakersfield have a lot in common? Or do the people in Silicon Valley share the same needs and concerns as do the people in the Central Valley? Do you think the people in Redding have the same political beliefs as the people in Santa Barbara? 

 

The people in Bakersfield, the Central Valley and Redding are forced to live by the votes of the people in LA, Silicon Valley and Santa Barbara even though they have nothing in common and have completely different needs. Why would you want to do that to the rest of the country? 

I do not think they do. But that's life. The State is the State and it encompasses all kinds of people and politics. If those people in the Valley are struggling they are also free to move to Texas if they want. I was in Lodi last night.  They seem to be doing fine. But the people in South Dakota having a more valuable vote than the people in Silicon Valley is also stupid. It goes both ways. 
 

 

The Electoral College affects ALL Americans.  State voting only affects those who "choose" to live in that State. And last time i checked, we are FREE to live in any state we want. 

[jerryskids 6,557]

8 minutes ago, purdygood said:

I do not think they do. But that's life. The State is the State and it encompasses all kinds of people and politics. If those people in the Valley are struggling they are also free to move to Texas if they want. I was in Lodi last night.  They seem to be doing fine. But the people in South Dakota having a more valuable vote than the people in Silicon Valley is also stupid. It goes both ways. 

California and South Dakota have the same number of EC votes?   

[purdygood 333]

8 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

California and South Dakota have the same number of EC votes?   

They dont.   But if you do the math.  EC Votes divided by voters.  Their votes are "worth more". 

[squistion 1,944]

12 hours ago, 5-Points said:

They'll get as much Due Process on the way out as they got on the way in.

It doesn't work that way.

Under The Constitution everyone in this country, legally or illegally, citizens or non-citizens are still entitled to Due Process under the law.

[5-Points 3,387]

1 hour ago, purdygood said:

I do not think they do. But that's life. The State is the State and it encompasses all kinds of people and politics. If those people in the Valley are struggling they are also free to move to Texas if they want. I was in Lodi last night.  They seem to be doing fine. But the people in South Dakota having a more valuable vote than the people in Silicon Valley is also stupid. It goes both ways. 
 

 

The Electoral College affects ALL Americans.  State voting only affects those who "choose" to live in that State. And last time i checked, we are FREE to live in any state we want. 

Right. Which is why the citizens California shouldn't dictate how the citizens of South Dakots have to live. Don't look now but you're making an argument in favor of the EC. 

 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

2 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Right. Which is why the citizens California shouldn't dictate how the citizens of South Dakots have to live. Don't look now but you're making an argument in favor of the EC. 

Oh damn!!!! 

He may have to turn in his effeminate liberal man card once they find out at DNC HQ.

[SaintsInDome2006 375]

2 hours ago, 5-Points said:

I think allowing 10's of millions of unvetted, illegal immigrants, from all over the world, to pour into our country in such a short period of time, with zero accountability for their whereabouts, no plan to deal with them long term and no means to facilitate their assimilation is far more detrimental to the country. 

I'm not saying it would easy or painless. I'm just saying it's necessary. We wouldn't be in this mess if the current administration had just kept the policies of the previous administration in place instead of doing away with them, out of spite, on day one with a stoke of a pen. 

Fwiw the only policy Trump put in place was due to the pandemic. & the rest was people across the globe ceasing to travel nearly altogether. He didn’t change anything either. In fact the only way to really & legally change things is to legislate it - which maybe for the first time in maybe 8 years there was an actual bipartisan bill to do, until The Donald decided it would be popular & therefore bad for him personally.

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

2 hours ago, 5-Points said:

 

I'm not saying it would easy or painless. I'm just saying it's necessary.

It’s never going to happen. And if you’re an honest person, in 10 years from now you will look at your life, look at the state of this country, and acknowledge finally that it was never “necessary” at all. 

[purdygood 333]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

Right. Which is why the citizens California shouldn't dictate how the citizens of South Dakots have to live. Don't look now but you're making an argument in favor of the EC. 

 

The citizens of South Dakota have a imbalanced advantage against the citizens of California when Voting for President.  So that's my argument against the Electoral College. It goes both ways.   If you are a citizen. Voting for the one Position that "rules us all". All our votes should count equally.  (Unless you are a founding father and black votes should only count as 3/5ths wink wink nudge nudge right)

[5-Points 3,387]

45 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Fwiw the only policy Trump put in place was due to the pandemic. & the rest was people across the globe ceasing to travel nearly altogether. He didn’t change anything either. In fact the only way to really & legally change things is to legislate it - which maybe for the first time in maybe 8 years there was an actual bipartisan bill to do, until The Donald decided it would be popular & therefore bad for him personally.

His Remain in Mexico policy helped to drastically reduce the number of illegal crossings both by forcing the so called "asylum seekers" to stay out of the country while their cases were adjudicated and as a deterrent to making the journey in the first place. 

Also, I fail to see how a guy who isn't in the game, he wasn't even on the sidelines, he was in the stands watching the game, is calling the plays. How can he have any meaningful impact on the decision making in Congress? There was something in the bill that was a non-starter for those who voted against it. 

[5-Points 3,387]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s never going to happen. And if you’re an honest person, in 10 years from now you will look at your life, look at the state of this country, and acknowledge finally that it was never “necessary” at all. 

Highly doubtful. 

[5-Points 3,387]

7 minutes ago, purdygood said:

The citizens of South Dakota have a imbalanced advantage against the citizens of California when Voting for President.  So that's my argument against the Electoral College. It goes both ways.   If you are a citizen. Voting for the one Position that "rules us all". All our votes should count equally.  (Unless you are a founding father and black votes should only count as 3/5ths wink wink nudge nudge right)

The Elctoral College isn't going away anytime soon, if ever. If you don't like that I guess you're free to move.

[purdygood 333]

12 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

The Elctoral College isn't going away anytime soon, if ever. If you don't like that I guess you're free to move.

Oh im in 100% agreement with that.  I just want to point out how stupid and unfair it is to MILLIONS of citizens who want to live in the most desirable locations within this lovely country we have. Who have to live under the whims of people who live in Iowa. 
 

The biggest state population wise, the 5th biggest economy in the world alone is out represented on a per vote share basis by Arizona.  Based on the Electoral College.   Cactus done vote. 

[5-Points 3,387]

8 minutes ago, purdygood said:

Oh im in 100% agreement with that.  I just want to point out how stupid and unfair it is to MILLIONS of citizens who want to live in the most desirable locations within this lovely country we have. Who have to live under the whims of people who live in Iowa. 

We don't live in a democracy. It isn't mob rule. The Founders set the system up the way they did for a reason. 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

23 minutes ago, purdygood said:

The citizens of South Dakota have an imbalanced advantage against the citizens of California when Voting for President.  So that's my argument against the Electoral College. It goes both ways.   If you are a citizen. Voting for the one Position that "rules us all". All our votes should count equally.  (Unless you are a founding father and black votes should only count as 3/5ths wink wink nudge nudge right)

California has 54 EC votes. South Dakota has 3. Also, Illegals count on the census giving California the one with an unbalanced advantage when voting for President. You all should brush up on your maths before making dumb statements. 

[purdygood 333]

2 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

We don't live in a democracy. It isn't mob rule. The Founders set the system up the way they did for a reason. 

The founders were also slave owners who had wooden teeth.   They also set the system up so it could evolve and change. (Amendments).  Just one side knows they have a minority advantage and will never give it up.

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

2 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

We don't live in a democracy. It isn't mob rule. The Founders set the system up the way they did for a reason. 

“I do not say that Democracy has been more pernicious, on the whole, and in the long run, than Monarchy or Aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as Aristocracy or Monarchy. But while it lasts it is more bloody than either.“

The left is either internationally obtuse on this fact or incredibly naive. Both are dangerously stupid. 

[purdygood 333]

4 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

California has 54 EC votes. South Dakota has 3. Also, Illegals count on the census giving California the one with an unbalanced advantage when voting for President. You all should brush up on your maths before making dumb statements. 

You think illegals fill out census info? Most citizens ignore that.  
 

what should matter is citizens who actually show up to vote. 

[5-Points 3,387]

Just now, purdygood said:

The founders were also slave owners who had wooden teeth.   They also set the system up so it could evolve and change. (Amendments).  Just one side knows they have a minority advantage and will never give it up.

Slavery was the norm back then. It means nothing. It was a worldwide institution of which we partook very little. 

And yes, they devised a system that could be changed. They also allowed for states to secede should they decide they no longer want to be part of the union. How'd that workout last time? 

[purdygood 333]

4 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Slavery was the norm back then. It means nothing. It was a worldwide institution of which we partook very little. 

And yes, they devised a system that could be changed. They also allowed for states to secede should they decide they no longer want to be part of the union. How'd that workout last time? 

We partook very little?  OK

 

Yeah last time that happened, the South got their ass kicked. Because they wanted to partake a lot more than a little. 
 

How little slavery are you ok partaking in?

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

1 minute ago, purdygood said:

You think illegals fill out census info? Most citizens ignore that.  

Don’t be stupid 

“The foreign-born population in the United States has grown considerably over the past 50 years in both size and share of the U.S. population. In 1970, it numbered 9.6 million (4.7 percent) of the total U.S. population. By 2022, it was estimated to be 46.2 million (13.9 percent) of the total U.S. population.”

“In California, New Jersey, New York, and Florida, foreign-born individuals constituted more than 20 percent of the state’s population.”

”Foreign-born are people who were not U.S. citizens at birth, including naturalized U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents (immigrants), temporary migrants (such as foreign students), humanitarian migrants (such as refugees and asylees), and unauthorized migrants.”

https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acsbr-019.pdf

[purdygood 333]

1 minute ago, Dizkneelande said:

Don’t be stupid 

“The foreign-born population in the United States has grown considerably over the past 50 years in both size and share of the U.S. population. In 1970, it numbered 9.6 million (4.7 percent) of the total U.S. population. By 2022, it was estimated to be 46.2 million (13.9 percent) of the total U.S. population.”

“In California, New Jersey, New York, and Florida, foreign-born individuals constituted more than 20 percent of the state’s population.”

”Foreign-born are people who were not U.S. citizens at birth, including naturalized U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents (immigrants), temporary migrants (such as foreign students), humanitarian migrants (such as refugees and asylees), and unauthorized migrants.”

https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acsbr-019.pdf

Heavy emphasis on "estimated". Now we think Government and the Media know how to do their jobs and are to be Trusted. 

[5-Points 3,387]

16 minutes ago, purdygood said:

We partook very little?  OK

 

Yeah last time that happened, the South got their ass kicked. Because they wanted to partake a lot more than a little. 

Yeah. Anywhere between 1.5 to 5 percent of all Americans actually owned slaves, depending on whose numbers you want to use and only about 1/4 of Southerners owned slaves.

Also, only around 5% of all slaves ended up in America. 95% of all African slaves were sold to other countries. 

So, like I said, we partook very little in the institution of slavery in this country. 

 

Unfortunately, the left is trying to bring it back by importing millions of cheap laborers who they can pay pennies on the dollar to do the work they would have to pay native born Americans much more to do. 

[purdygood 333]

2 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Yeah. Anywhere between 1.5 to 5 percent of all Americans actually owned slaves, depending on whose numbers you want to use. And only around 5% of all slaves ended up in America. 95% of all African slaves were sold to other countries. 

So, like I said, we partook very little in the institution of slavery in this country. 

That is one way to look at it.  Ok.  Agree to disagree on 5% being "very little".  I do agree it was a world wide institution going back to the days of "The Bible". Ever hear of Moses?   Even 5% is 5% too much. 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

14 minutes ago, purdygood said:

Heavy emphasis on "estimated". Now we think Government and the Media know how to do their jobs and are to be Trusted. 

It’s the U.S. Census. You do realize it’s what is used to calculate EC votes right? 

[SaintsInDome2006 375]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

His Remain in Mexico policy helped to drastically reduce the number of illegal crossings both by forcing the so called "asylum seekers" to stay out of the country while their cases were adjudicated and as a deterrent to making the journey in the first place. 

Also, I fail to see how a guy who isn't in the game, he wasn't even on the sidelines, he was in the stands watching the game, is calling the plays. How can he have any meaningful impact on the decision making in Congress? There was something in the bill that was a non-starter for those who voted against it. 

I don’t have a problem with Remain, & IIRC it was baked into Lankford’s bill,?but again statistically nothing happened until the pandemic.

As for your second point - yeah I agree, it’s almost offensive that a non-elected private citizen could wield that kind of power- but it’s a state fact by Republicans & Trump alike that they halted their own bill at Trump’s behest.

[purdygood 333]

50 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

It’s the U.S. Census. You do realize it’s what is used to calculate EC votes right? 

Of course.  But do you think the census is accurate?

[Gepetto 1,288]

5 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I appreciate the more thoughtful response. I’ll point out first of all it was Republicans who ultimately refused Trump’s plan for the “wall”. Im not even against the wall in the sense it’s just a continuation of old policies that included fencing. 

But mass deportation? It’s pro-inflationary, incredibly expensive, wildly expands federal/centralized power, & would damage us in a myriad of unforeseen ways. That’s before we get to the civil/human rights issues.

So you're OK spending money to remove Russians from Ukraine (even though Russians are still in Ukraine). But you won't spend money to remove the invaders in our very own country? How sad.

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

43 minutes ago, purdygood said:

Of course.  But do you think the census is accurate?

No but that’s not what you are trying to do here and irrelevant to how EC votes are distributed. They are indeed counted so that’s a loss for your pathetic argument and blue states are over represented because of it. The census number is under represented but for some reason the corrupted leftist media that you suck the teet of keeps trotting out a 30 year old 11 million illegal alien number even though the Census as under represented as is, blows that number out of the water. 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

28 minutes ago, Gepetto said:

So you're OK spending money to remove Russians from Ukraine (even though Russians are still in Ukraine). But you won't spend money to remove the invaders in our very own country? How sad.

Plus the expanding the Fed argument is laughable. Securing our borders and enforcing immigration is a Fed responsibility. 

[purdygood 333]

8 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

No but that’s not what you are trying to do here and irrelevant to how EC votes are distributed. They are indeed counted so that’s a loss for your pathetic argument and blue states are over represented because of it. The census number is under represented but for some reason the corrupted leftist media that you suck the teet of keeps trotting out a 30 year old 11 million illegal alien number even though the Census as under represented as is, blows that number out of the water. 

The "blue left" may be over represented by the census.  And the House. But the "Red Right" is over represented in the Senate.  The President shouldn't need the Electoral College.  It should be elected by ALL the citizens regardless of where they live.
 

Then they can all work together.
 

But the "Red Right" has a advantage in two of those three currently... Because of the Electoral College. So a lot of "Blue Voters" feel like Rural areas (less people) are making decisions for them. (More people) Just like many Rural voters are "afraid" CA and NY will make decisions for them if it goes away. 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

2 hours ago, 5-Points said:

Yeah. Anywhere between 1.5 to 5 percent of all Americans actually owned slaves, depending on whose numbers you want to use and only about 1/4 of Southerners owned slaves.

Also, only around 5% of all slaves ended up in America. 95% of all African slaves were sold to other countries. 

So, like I said, we partook very little in the institution of slavery in this country. 

 

 

This is a prime example of how statistics can be falsely used to make wrong assumptions. What made American slavery almost unique is that it was chattel slavery: meaning that if you were born to a slave, you became a slave yourself. Thats why only 5% of the slaves ended up here: because once imported they multiplied on their own without having to buy any more. In fact, the northernmost slave states, led by Virginia, made the African slave trade illegal so as to maintain their value of their slaves. But African slaves represented a huge percentage of the southern population of this country, particularly after the invention of the cotton gin (created in this country by Eli Whitney) so your statement that “we participated very little in the institution of slavery) is 100% bullsh!t. 

[5-Points 3,387]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is a prime example of how statistics can be falsely used to make wrong assumptions. What made American slavery almost unique is that it was chattel slavery: meaning that if you were born to a slave, you became a slave yourself. Thats why only 5% of the slaves ended up here: because once imported they multiplied on their own without having to buy any more. In fact, the northernmost slave states, led by Virginia, made the African slave trade illegal so as to maintain their value of their slaves. But African slaves represented a huge percentage of the southern population of this country, particularly after the invention of the cotton gin (created in this country by Eli Whitney) so your statement that “we participated very little in the institution of slavery) is 100% bullsh!t. 

Translation: The stats don't support my beliefs so the stats are buIIshit. 

 

 

[SaintsInDome2006 375]

1 hour ago, Gepetto said:

So you're OK spending money to remove Russians from Ukraine (even though Russians are still in Ukraine). But you won't spend money to remove the invaders in our very own country? How sad.

The Lankford (R) border bill greatly increased resources to enforcing the INA. Yes I’m in favor of that.

[jonnyutah 248]

4 hours ago, purdygood said:

The citizens of South Dakota have a imbalanced advantage against the citizens of California when Voting for President.  So that's my argument against the Electoral College. It goes both ways.   If you are a citizen. Voting for the one Position that "rules us all". All our votes should count equally.  (Unless you are a founding father and black votes should only count as 3/5ths wink wink nudge nudge right)

Do they? I have never looked at this before. What percentage of elections has CA gone in favor of the president and what percentage has SD? 

 

[BudBro 173]

3 hours ago, purdygood said:

  It should be elected by ALL the citizens regardless of where they live.
 

I'm sure the founding fathers never heard this argument prior to you.

[SaintsInDome2006 375]

3 hours ago, Dizkneelande said:

Plus the expanding the Fed argument is laughable. Securing our borders and enforcing immigration is a Fed responsibility. 

It is, it’s specifically delegated to Congress in the Constitution. Instead of asking Congress to handle its responsibilities Trump is suggesting a raft of executive orders & centralization of power in the presidency. 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

11 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It is, it’s specifically delegated to Congress in the Constitution. Instead of asking Congress to handle its responsibilities Trump is suggesting a raft of executive orders & centralization of power in the presidency. 

Weird response considering the Biden administration issued 60 executive orders in the first few months to dismantle our border and created the worst illegal immigration crisis in history. 

[The Psychic Observer 495]