• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP kills immigration bill= big loss in 2014?

APACHERAT said:
Then it looks like it's another five years of depending on government.
Click to expand...

Yup, you are correct. Another 5 years, just like the past 53+. Now tell me again, how many times when republicans held both houses of congress and the POTUS did they eliminate means tested welfare? Republicans love welfare just as much as dems do.

There's a term floating around, it's "trailer trash republicans". It describes the type of people who stand in front of their doublewide, and discuss how the 47% are ruining this country. Obviously, they don't understand that they ARE in the 47%.

The only way that we are going to get rid of means tested welfare is to get rid of politicians, both the republicans and the democrats.
 
Woodman909 said:
Yes, most illegal voters are democrats.
They are not allowed by law.
They try to vote and many succeed.
Poor? yes, but have you seen the price of a good landscaper in Calif. lately?
Apathetic, no, they vote for whoever will give them stuff for free.
Apathetic people voting in large numbers? They are herded by the free stuff givers...
Do you really think the current admin. wants you to know how many illegals voted for them?
People who believe there are no illegals voting are making **** up daily.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for a link to something that proves any of that.

There are a ton of illegals in my area, but when I go to vote, about all I see is white people and black people, and the majority of them are over age 65. I can't remember ever seeing a hispanic in line to vote. Maybe it's just in your neigborhood where non-citizens (legal or illegal) are allowed to vote. You should report that immediately to the authorities.

Regardless, in this thread we have already come to the collective conclusion that dems will keep winning elections for at least the next five years. If you are correct, then I can only assume that republicans will be out of business for ever.

By the way, this article http://nation.foxnews.com/illegal-i...l-gives-illegal-immigrants-full-voting-rights proves that few if any illegals vote.
 
Last edited:
imagep said:
You can look up any of those "bold claims" using google. Sorry, I can't site any sources off the top of my head, all I know is what I watch on Fox News, maybe they make that stuff up, who knows?

My last paragraph was just my opinion. You are welcome to disagree if you like.

Sorry, I don't know anything about "Organizing for America", but it wasn't an issue about being a non-profit, the IRS decided that all of those organizations who were investigated and who received inappropriate letters were indeed non-profits, the issue is what type of non-profit they are. The classification that they were applying for didn't permit political groups, it was intended just to be for local clubs and civic organizations, things like the mens garden club, or the downtown beautification organization. I'm not passing judgement on any of those groups, only explaining my understanding of the facts.
Click to expand...

Right and the group that ran obamas campaign is classified as one of those non profits ant wasn't targeted.Not to mention the fact that those involved and their union gave to the Obama campaign. And the White House chief of staff and counsel knew about this before the election and said nothing to the American people.
 
imagep said:
Republicans have only two chances of gaining seats or the POTUS. The first chance is economic collapse. That doesn't appear likely anytime soon, not at least if APACHERAT is correct (and he claims to be "Very Conservative". The second chance is if there is a major scandal that actually directly involves the POTUS, and so far conservative attempts to manufacture such scandals have fell flat, or actually backfired (as in the case of the IRS scandal).

Hey, I didn't vote for Obama, or any other Dem in the last election, I'm not in the bag for him, but I'm just being realistic here.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It's generally hard for the incumbent's side to gain seats or even break even in the sixth year of a term. The partisan makeup of the seats also favors the GOP for both the senate and the House in 2014. Obama's job approval right now and the Democrats' lead in the generic congressional ballot are below where they were in 2012 which was a presidential election with higher turnout which favored the Democrats anyway. If anything, right now I'd say that 2014 slightly favors the Republicans, but a lot can happen before November next year. I see little sign right now of the Republicans faring any worse than in 2012.
 
YoungConserv said:
Right and the group that ran obamas campaign is classified as one of those non profits ant wasn't targeted.Not to mention the fact that those involved and their union gave to the Obama campaign. And the White House chief of staff and counsel knew about this before the election and said nothing to the American people.
Click to expand...

Was that group a 401C4 which applied for that status during the time period in question? I don't know. If not, your point is moot.
 
Anagram said:
I disagree. It's generally hard for the incumbent's side to gain seats or even break even in the sixth year of a term. The partisan makeup of the seats also favors the GOP for both the senate and the House in 2014. Obama's job approval right now and the Democrats' lead in the generic congressional ballot are below where they were in 2012 which was a presidential election with higher turnout which favored the Democrats anyway. If anything, right now I'd say that 2014 slightly favors the Republicans, but a lot can happen before November next year. I see little sign right now of the Republicans faring any worse than in 2012.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right, as I said before, I wouldn't want to see a one party system.
 
imagep said:
Everyone wants free stuff. Even the rich.
Click to expand...

Not I, and there are still tens and tens of millions of Americans who are willing to break a sweat and support themselves without relying on others.

There are millions of Americans who may qualify for welfare, food stamps, etc. who have to much individual pride and refuse free stuff because nothing is free, someone is paying for it.

Welfare was suppose to be a safety net, not something that you get addicted to where you have a monkey on your back, where you become dependent on government. Once you got that monkey on your back your going to want more free stuff that I and others are actually paying for.

Right now, 1/3 of all illegal alien families are already receiving welfare of some kind. Even 1/3 of all legal immigrant families are receiving at least one welfare subsidy in violation of the law because legal immigrants are forbidden of going on the doe during the first ten years in the country. But no one enforces the law.

Had to come back and reedit my post, got the numbers wrong. -> https://www.numbersusa.com/content/...d-immigration/immigrants-and-welfare-use.html
 
Last edited:
imagep said:
Doesn't matter, republicans have screwed up politically on so many different things that they don't have a chance of increasing their numbers in either house of congress.

Heck, once Jan 1st comes and goes, and our economy doesn't collapse due to Obamacare, republicans will be discredited for decades. Some republicans are already back tracking on their dire predictions, but the population heard what they originally said, and there are enough republicans who are still claiming that Obamacare is going to destroy our economy that it's going to be impossible for those who are backtracking from that to seperate themselves from that nonsense.

I think it's a shame that we are going to become a one party nation for a long long time. Of course I would prefer a no party nation where everyone votes on the merits of the individual candidates, instead of just voting for their club.
Click to expand...


:lamo :lamo

No seriously

:2rofll::2rofll:
 
clownboy said:
Hmmm, sounds eerily like the predicions the dems were making before their last major electorial defeat. We'll just see how it goes in the 2014 elections.
Click to expand...


Also sounds a lot like the electoral vote predictions that were being made for Obama before 11/2012.
 
Helix said:
they'll sign off on an immigration bill. most likely, they are trying to water it down as much as possible, as was done with the PPACA. hopefully the immigration bill won't be rendered almost useless, as was the case with health care reform.
Click to expand...

It was designed to be useless by the Senate. Illegals would have to register now and keep their information current but not be allowed a pathway to citizenship until after our borders are deemed secure, whatever that is.
 
APACHERAT said:
Not I, and there are still tens and tens of millions of Americans who are willing to break a sweat and support themselves without relying on others.

There are millions of Americans who may qualify for welfare, food stamps, etc. who have to much individual pride and refuse free stuff because nothing is free, someone is paying for it.
Click to expand...

So you don't want to pay a lower tax rate? I know I do. However, lower taxes is effectively the same as "getting something for free". Like I said, everyone wants something.
 
Fisher said:
:lamo :lamo

No seriously

:2rofll::2rofll:
Click to expand...

Seriously, I would prefer a no party system. But of course I have already admitted that in this thread.
 
jamesrage said:
Any immigration bill with amnesty,legalization for illegals or any other form of amnesty should be killed.
Click to expand...

It would have been nice if you had bothered to explain why.
 
imagep said:
Seriously, I would prefer a no party system. But of course I have already admitted that in this thread.
Click to expand...

So billionaires can take turns being President?
 
imagep said:
I live in what was a hotbed for the tea party. For a while we had nuts with signs and revolutionary war uniforms standing at some street corner every weekend. Haven't seen such in close to two years though.
Click to expand...

Personally speaking I'd say that's good news. On a similar note, we appear to be OWS free around here these days - another good thing.

imagep said:
Obviously you haven't been keeping up with the news. Again, you haven't been watching the news. UE has dropped below 8% and based upon the low unemployment claims during May, I expect that the news this week will be that unemployment has dropped again. Now I agree that our unemployment rate is horrendous, but we tend to vote based upon what the trend is, not what the absolute figure is. Democrats won the POTUS election in 2008 because unemployment was getting worse, they won again in 2012 because it was getting better. You can go back to most any election cycle and see that when unemployment is getting worse, the POTUS changes parties, and when it is getting better the current party is reelected.
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed I have been reading the news (don't keep track of what the talking heads are saying much these days). The deficit reduction, like the reduction of the UE figures is entirely smoke and mirrors - and obviously so. The only reason unemployment is dropping a bit is because a whole bunch of folks have dropped off the stats. They're still unemployed, just that the government no longer counts them.

imagep said:
There is no election this year, so I would expect that you would see less and less signs supporting any candidates. Why would someone be campaigning when there is no election? Or are you just trying to be funny.
Click to expand...

We just had local and some state elections here.
 
imagep said:
It would have been nice if you had bothered to explain why.
Click to expand...

I am against illegal immigration.Amnesty/legalization for illegals encourages more illegal immigration. We had mass amnesty before and it didn't work out. Flooding the labor market with 12-20 million people screws with the wages of Americans. If we grant amnesty,legalization for illegals, the dream act or some other form of amnesty then we will have 36-60 million illegals 20 years from now.Any enforcement measures will be removed or funding stripped out once all the illegals have legalization.
 
clownboy said:
Yes, indeed I have been reading the news (don't keep track of what the talking heads are saying much these days). The deficit reduction, like the reduction of the UE figures is entirely smoke and mirrors - and obviously so.
Click to expand...

I guess if you call restrained spending, increases in revenues, and lower expenditures on means tested welfare and unemployment benefits "smoke and mirrors", then it must be so. so exactly what wouldn't be "smoke and mirrors"? The same things but under a republican prresident?

The only reason unemployment is dropping a bit is because a whole bunch of folks have dropped off the stats. They're still unemployed, just that the government no longer counts them.
Click to expand...
Yes, people who are not working and not looking for work are not considered unemployed. My granny died a few months back, she was 99 years old and hadn't worked in decades. Are you suggesting that she should have been included in our unemployment figures? What about my friends new baby, should that baby be considered unemployed?

Anyhow, you obviously haven't actually looked at the figures, but the number of people who do have jobs has been increasing.
 
imagep said:
No, I would pick the president. Just who ever I felt like at the time.
Click to expand...

Now if we did it by lottery ticket--every $5 ticket gets you 1 chance to be President, maybe, but I pass on your plan.....
 
imagep said:
So you don't want to pay a lower tax rate? I know I do. However, lower taxes is effectively the same as "getting something for free". Like I said, everyone wants something.
Click to expand...

Well I live in a one party state where over half don't pay their fare share in taxes and a minority has been singled out to pay more than their fare share.

I have no problem paying taxes. The problem I have is where and how my tax money is spent.

Obama's amnesty will fail in the House. The reason it will fail is because as soon as a final bill is written up and and when the GAO reports on how many trillions of dollars the amnesty will cost the tax payers the same thing is going to happen the last time Congress tried to pass the McCain / Kennedy IRA, tens of millions of Americans will flood the phone banks with calls and faxes that the phone system in Washington DC will overload and collapse. That's what happened the last time.

And do you think adding 33 million new LEGAL immigrants over the next 10 years if this amnesty bill passes is going to be good for America ? Congress still refuses to take on change migration. Remember, this bill doubles legal immigration to over 2 million every year.

In 1986 the American people were lied to, we were told that the 1986 IRA (amnesty) was a one time thing and would never be done again. We were lied to and told our borders would be secured and our immigration laws enforced. THEY LIED !

Since 1986, Congress has snuck through six other amnesties with the same promises and with the same lies.
I'm tired of being lied to ! -> https://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/illegal-immigration/seven-amnesties-passed-congress.html
You'll notice that all of the past six amnesties happened under the Clinton administration.

Our nations immigration polices are suppose to be what is best for America, not what's best for the immigrant or the Democrat Party. Since the 1965 Immigration Reform Act it's been nothing but lies, broken promises and what's best for the immigrant, not what's best for America.
 
imagep said:
I guess if you call restrained spending, increases in revenues, and lower expenditures on means tested welfare and unemployment benefits "smoke and mirrors", then it must be so. so exactly what wouldn't be "smoke and mirrors"? The same things but under a republican prresident?
Click to expand...

The ONLY reason spending has been at all restrained is due to the sequester. The can is being kicked down the road.

imagep said:
Yes, people who are not working and not looking for work are not considered unemployed. My granny died a few months back, she was 99 years old and hadn't worked in decades. Are you suggesting that she should have been included in our unemployment figures? What about my friends new baby, should that baby be considered unemployed?

Anyhow, you obviously haven't actually looked at the figures, but the number of people who do have jobs has been increasing.
Click to expand...

Indeed, as has the number of people eligible to join the workforce. The folks I'm referring to are those who are no longer eligible for unemploment but are still unemployed. They're still there, of employment age and needing employment, but not employed. There's a lot of them. Eh, maybe they'll edge out the illegals in the day labor market. Oh joy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom