Are you a Reagan type conservative, or a Maga type conservative

[Ishm]

Seems like being both might be kinda hard!!

 

[longview]

Seems like being both might be kinda hard!!

Do you see Reagan's approach to immigration different than Trumps?
While I do not agree with Trumps methods, I think his goals and Reagan's goals are almost the same.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Do you see Reagan's approach to immigration different than Trumps?
While I do not agree with Trumps methods, I think his goals and Reagan's goals are almost the same.

Reagan's amnesty is the same as Trump's deportation?

 

[Peacenik]

Our diversity is what makes us great.

 

[longview]

Reagan's amnesty is the same as Trump's deportation?

The goal is to have legal immigration.

 

[The Brad Dad]

Eh, different monsters with dementia doing different kinds of harms to the country.

 

[Questerr]

The goal is to have legal immigration.

Great. Then a Democrat can advocate for giving all illegals amnesty and you’ll say they have the same immigration goals as Reagan and Trump, yes?

 

[Cameron]

I'm not conservative, but I respect the Reagan model principled conservative. I have zero respect for MAGA politicians, supporters, or defenders.

 

[gdgyva]

Reagan worked with congress and granted amnesty with the caveat that the immigration issues would be worked out.....they never were....the promises made to him were never kept.

People continued to flow over our borders, over stay their visa's, and we ended up right where we didnt need to be

There was a time in our country where we could take in unlimited numbers of immigrants from all over the world....but when they came, they were only promised a chance. They were basically on their own to make that dream come true

None of that is true anymore.....we have a broken system. Maybe it needs to be completely torn down, and rebuilt....and the number of people allowed in increased, and the cost decreased....

But when they come, they have to be able to support themselves.....having a dream is wonderful. Asking someone else to pay for it, not so much

 

[longview]

Great. Then a Democrat can advocate for giving all illegals amnesty and you’ll say they have the same immigration goals as Reagan and Trump, yes?

Sure, but that is not Trump's approach.
I agree with Reagan that the problem is that having illegals here means they are second class residents open for exploitation.
I think a better plan would be an expansion of NAFTA to include guest workers from Mexico and Canada,
but you have to start somewhere, and it was never going to be pleasant to get the people who came here illegally out of the country
to apply for legal immagration.

 

[Questerr]

Sure, but that is not Trump's approach.
I agree with Reagan that the problem is that having illegals here means they are second class residents open for exploitation.
I think a better plan would be an expansion of NAFTA to include guest workers from Mexico and Canada,
but you have to start somewhere, and it was never going to be pleasant to get the people who came here illegally out of the country
to apply for legal immagration.

So I should never see you calling Democrats “weak on immigration” when they advocate for amnesty for illegals, yes?

You will praise their pursuit of the same immigration goals as Trump and Reagan?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Reagan made a bad deal by approving mass amnesty now for a ‘promise’ (pinky swear?) to improve border security and interior immigration law enforcement later. The problem with any federal law is that the power of prosecutorial discretion (selective enforcement), especially by claiming ‘lack of resources’ allows for (nearly unlimited?) loopholes or ‘variations’.

 

[longview]

So I should never see you calling Democrats “weak on immigration” when they advocate for amnesty for illegals, yes?

You will praise their pursuit of the same immigration goals as Trump and Reagan?

Context! I think legal immigration is a good thing. We clearly need physical bodies to keep our population growing,
and our economic model likely will not work unless our population is growing.
I think the growth should be people we allow in as opposed to whoever shows up.
As a first step, I think we need an agreement with Mexico and Canada to allow guest workers,
with a path to permanent residency.
The real problem is the shadow economy, and the harm it can cause people.

 

[Questerr]

Context! I think legal immigration is a good thing. We clearly need physical bodies to keep our population growing,
and our economic model likely will not work unless our population is growing.
I think the growth should be people we allow in as opposed to whoever shows up.
As a first step, I think we need an agreement with Mexico and Canada to allow guest workers,
with a path to permanent residency.
The real problem is the shadow economy, and the harm it can cause people.

Reagan gave universal amnesty. That went to “whoever showed up”.

 

[Tigerace117]

Seems like being both might be kinda hard!!

Ronald Reagan was actively involved in supporting at least three separate genocides during his time in power. This effort to whitewash the guy simply because Trump is the current Republican leader is rather sad.

 

[longview]

Reagan gave universal amnesty. That went to “whoever showed up”.

In return for controlling the border, which the democrat congress did not honor.
Also it was not whoever showed up, but people who had been here since January 1, 1982.
It also made it illegal for an employer to knowing hire illegal immigrants.

 

[upsideguy]

Sure, but that is not Trump's approach.
I agree with Reagan that the problem is that having illegals here means they are second class residents open for exploitation.
I think a better plan would be an expansion of NAFTA to include guest workers from Mexico and Canada,
but you have to start somewhere, and it was never going to be pleasant to get the people who came here illegally out of the country
to apply for legal immagration.

Why is bolded part necessary? [shaking my head violently at what appears to be a nonsensical statement]

Many of these people, though they may not be here legally, have proven themselves to be good hardworking, law abiding citizens. Why apply Trump's expensive, inhumane (to cruel), indecent extraction of persons, all an anathema to the teachings of Christ (and many want to think we are a Christian nation -- we are not, as this shows) just so they can "re-apply"? It is completely nonsensical (actually, its stupid).

Immigration policy needs to be drastically reformed consistent with long-standing American values, then applied consistently.

A whole paragraph saying providing a pathway to citizenship for our illegal residents makes far, far, far more sense.

In return for controlling the border, which the democrat congress did not honor.
Also it was not whoever showed up, but people who had been here since January 1, 1982.
It also made it illegal for an employer to knowing hire illegal immigrants.

Yes, and why is that law not enforced? It would be far, far easier (and would be far more humane) to make it hard for illegals to find work, then doing what Trump is doing. It just seems like cruelty is the goal.

 

[Questerr]

In return for controlling the border, which the democrat congress did not honor.
Also it was not whoever showed up, but people who had been here since January 1, 1982.
It also made it illegal for an employer to knowing hire illegal immigrants.

Correct anyone who had shown up prior to that date was given amnesty.

 

[ttwtt78640]

In return for controlling the border, which the democrat congress did not honor.
Also it was not whoever showed up, but people who had been here since January 1, 1982.
It also made it illegal for an employer to knowing hire illegal immigrants.

How well is that (bolded above) being enforced?

 

[longview]

Why is bolded part necessary? [shaking my head violently at what appears to be a nonsensical statement]

Many of these people, though they may not be here legally, have proven themselves to be good hardworking, law abiding citizens. Why apply Trump's expensive, inhumane (to cruel), indecent extraction of persons, all an anathema to the teachings of Christ (and many want to think we are a Christian nation -- we are not, as this shows) just so they can "re-apply"? It is completely nonsensical (actually, its stupid).

Immigration policy needs to be drastically reformed consistent with long-standing American values, then applied consistently.

A whole paragraph saying providing a pathway to citizenship for our illegal residents makes far, far, far more sense.


Yes, and why is that law not enforced? It would be far, far easier (and would be far more humane) to make it hard for illegals to find work, then doing what Trump is doing. It just seems like cruelty is the goal.

It is necessary because of existing laws, you cannot apply to come here if you are here!
Students have to leave the country to reapply for their student visa's.
I sure something could be worked out, but how do Republicans make deals with Democrats who have not honored
their commitments in the past?

 

[longview]

Correct anyone who had shown up prior to that date was given amnesty.

Past tense, they had to be here and working for at least those 4 years.

 

[longview]

How well is that (bolded above) being enforced?

I am not sure it is at all, partly because the e-verify system is not working.

 

[nota bene]

Credit where it is due:

Who was William F. Buckley Jr.? How did he achieve the prominence he did? And what does he mean to the modern conservative movement? Alvin Felzenberg attempts to answer these questions in A Man and His Presidents: The Political Odyssey of William F. Buckley Jr.
Buckley is known to most people today as the founding editor of National Review, the premier conservative magazine and, for a long time, the only prominent conservative magazine in the United States. But as Felzenberg reveals, Buckley was more than a prolific writer: He was the brains and coalescing force of a post-World War II philosophy that gradually became known as “conservatism” and which culminated with the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan as president.

Review: The roots of American conservatism

William F. Buckley Jr. was more than a prolific writer: He was the brains and coalescing force of a post-World War II philosophy that gradually became known as “conservatism” and which culminated with the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan as president.

www.americamagazine.org

 

[Questerr]

Past tense, they had to be here and working for at least those 4 years.

Yep. And anyone who just showed up during that time was allowed to stay.

How would their work status be demonstrated when their employment was illegal?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The goal is to have legal immigration.

MAGA proved they're not interested in helping make that a reality when they shot down a historic bipartisan vote on immigration reform back in 2019.
It would have created some 1500 new Border Patrol positions and directed billions toward improving the ability for courts to process applications from all points, asylum, legal immigration applications, DACA, TPS, processing through Ports of Entry, etc.

MAGA does not want ANY legal immigration unless it is white, European and Christian Nationalist.

PS: It would be great if the author @Ishm would make a companion POLL question to go with this thread.