Trumpkins are gullible-ass SOBs, that or they're just purely ignorant partisans

[Somerville]

Is there a cause for concern for immigration problems in America?

BTW, how many undocumenteds are in the US, right now?

Some studies of the undocumented aliens in the US have found a net positive benefit for the economy. What I see as the best estimates of their numbers is in the range of 10.5 to 12 million.

 

[jnug]

Since you don't think walls work 100% of the time (and I can show were they do) should, for example, drones be discontinued because they aren't 100% effective in preventing illegal immigration? Should, for example, E-Verify be discontinued because it isn't 100% effective in preventing illegal immigration? Should, for example, revoking all temporary visas (if that were proposed) be discontinued because it isn't 100% effective in preventing illegal immigration?

BTW, how much is the US spending on the effects of illegal immigration? The medical, the education the (ahem) Social Security benefits? I'd wager it's more than 5 billion for the wall.

He's an idea: let's combine the wall, E-Verify, stopping temporary visas, drones, etc. to prevent illegal immigration.

I asked you not to cherry pick and what do you go off and do? Cherry pick.

Physical barriers can be border security assets and do work when they are well placed (as in urban areas along the border) and integrated with other assets that are complementary. Physical barrier can be pricy to deploy and difficult to maintain. But it still has places where it is an asset to border security. Drones can be border security assets and do work when they are well placed (as in prairie or frontier along the border) and integrated with other assets that are complementary.

I might suggest that fewer drones would be an effective use of border investment in urban areas but would probably even want some number of drones there and more, many more along areas of open prairie or frontier along the border along with other sensing instrumentation and personnel and personnel transport. I would also suggest that for areas of open prairie or frontier or even sparsely populated areasalong the border, physical barrier is an utter waste of time and money. It is no asset at all as part of a border security system. In fact, a case can be made that its a liability.

 

[SDET]

Some studies of the undocumented aliens in the US have found a net positive benefit for the economy. What I see as the best estimates of their numbers is in the range of 10.5 to 12 million.

In that case, if we stop doing criminal background checks altogether, it would be an even bigger benefit to the economy. Hiring felons is a great idea, as long as they are from countries that don't have an effective criminal justice system.

 

[trouble13]

Trump didn't make a change...he simply made another of his non-commital commitments. Like I said, according to Trump himself, solid construction is still under consideration. By the way, Slats was not a dem request. That is another Trump lie. CBP would prefer to be able to see through any additional physical barrier at the border. Somebody finally clued Donald into that though it has been known by anybody that has actually followed border barrier technology and the CBP for any amount of time at all.

I'm still waiting for an example of the Democrats moving their position from you. Is there reason you've avoided doing that twice now. Maybe because there are no examples?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[jnug]

I'm still waiting for an example of the Democrats moving their position from you. Is there reason you've avoided doing that twice now. Maybe because there are no examples?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

They don't have to move their position. Their position is the correct position. There, happy now! Hope you have not been holding your breath.

 

[trouble13]

Red:
What? Are you seriously asserting that the shift from concrete to steel bollard fencing (slats) constitutes a positional move?

If that's your idea of a concession:

Yes it is. Trump went from a concrete wall to a slotted fence. He has also gone down from 25B to 5B to 2B

Same question to you now. What concessions have the Democrats offered to make?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[jnug]

Yes it is. Trump went from a concrete wall to a slotted fence. He has also gone down from 25B to 5B to 2B

Same question to you now. What concessions have the Democrats offered to make?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

He hasn't. He said on Friday that solid construction is still under consideration. Trump does not know what he wants and not knowing what he wants is not adopting a flexible position. Its simply him not knowing what he wants.

$25B down to $5B, down to $2B, up to $5.6B all of it an effort to bootstrap to a CR which is not the place to try to secure new Appropriations. Again not knowing what Trump wants is not adopting a new position, it is simply him not knowing what he wants.

This Walls exists in that gum ball machine mind of Donald's and nowhere else and it will never exist anywhere else. Bet the mortgage on it.

 

[eohrnberger]

In my experience, people who run around claiming to be smart, aren't. If they were, there'd be no need to run around claiming it at every opportunity.

An excellent observation. One that could, would, and should, be equally applied to all the liberals / progressive / Democrats that claim the same as well as their imagined moral superiority.

 

[Xelor]

I think we all posting that dems are purely gullible and ignorant partisans.

That's a straightforward enough claim to make, yet other than you, nobody's made it; moreover, unlike my opposite assertion in the OP, nobody's made a case for that proposition's verity by citing some sort of data that can reasonably extrapolated to support the assertion you've presented.

 

[humbolt]

An excellent observation. One that could, would, and should, be equally applied to all the liberals / progressive / Democrats that claim the same as well as their imagined moral superiority.

One can easily make the case that our failure to dissuade these people from making such an arduous and dangerous journey is immoral.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Accusations of 'holding Federal Employees hostage' and that this is 'Trump's shutdown' are little more than projection and accusing the other side of what they are themselves have done and are doing. Typically Democrat.

Maybe you missed it - Trump accepted blame/credit for the shutdown, so "trump shutdown" is apt.

 

[eohrnberger]

One can easily make the case that our failure to dissuade these people from making such an arduous and dangerous journey is immoral.

Their choosing to make 'such an arduous and dangerous journey' is their choice so their responsibility. Sure, other may try to dissuade them, and have tried, but in the end one has to be responsible for the choices that one makes.

 

[eohrnberger]

Maybe you missed it - Trump accepted blame/credit for the shutdown, so "trump shutdown" is apt.

If you ignore the concessions the administration has made to try and make a deal. No, this is at the Dem's feet and their unwillingness to do the same.

 

[humbolt]

Their choosing to make 'such an arduous and dangerous journey' is their choice so their responsibility. Sure, other may try to dissuade them, and have tried, but in the end one has to be responsible for the choices that one makes.

True, but when you arrive at the border and can enter unfettered, that's a large incentive to take your chances on the trip.

 

[trouble13]

He hasn't. He said on Friday that solid construction is still under consideration. Trump does not know what he wants and not knowing what he wants is not adopting a flexible position. Its simply him not knowing what he wants.

$25B down to $5B, down to $2B, up to $5.6B all of it an effort to bootstrap to a CR which is not the place to try to secure new Appropriations. Again not knowing what Trump wants is not adopting a new position, it is simply him not knowing what he wants.

This Walls exists in that gum ball machine mind of Donald's and nowhere else and it will never exist anywhere else. Bet the mortgage on it.

Why shouldn't he remove his offer. If I were him I'd make the wall bigger now and maybe add a few more things I might want.

This isnt a negotiation if both sides are not willing to make concessions as you clearly know since you have not posted a single concession offered by the Democrats. Dems think standing pat is a winning position for them. So be it. Hold the line.

Whining about Trump holding his line isnt going to make the truth and different. Enjoy your shutdown. Personally I'm fine if the shutdown continues until every immigration reform is done


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[eohrnberger]

True, but when you arrive at the border and can enter unfettered, that's a large incentive to take your chances on the trip.

Absolutely. An imposing physical border barrier, along with commensurate other proven effective measures, would indeed do exactly that.
Its time to effect this imposing physical border barrier, along with mandatory eVerify and further ICE deportations of illegal immigrants who are in country.
An 'all of the above' strategy. I'm not against it.

 

[jnug]

Why shouldn't he remove his offer. If I were him I'd make the wall bigger now and maybe add a few more things I might want.

This isnt a negotiation if both sides are not willing to make concessions as you clearly know since you have not posted a single concession offered by the Democrats. Dems think standing pat is a winning position for them. So be it. Hold the line.

Whining about Trump holding his line isnt going to make the truth and different. Enjoy your shutdown. Personally I'm fine if the shutdown continues until every immigration reform is done


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

And whining about the Dems holding their line is? Have you seen the polls on this shutdown? Eventually McConnell is going to have to give in and allow a Senate vote on the Bills just passed in the House. At that point if Trump vetos his veto will be overturned. Nobody is going to give in for a stupid Wall that Trump could not even get past the Hill when he had Majorities in both Houses. Not happening.

 

[Conaeolos]

That led me to posit that Trumpkins are some stupid, intransigent, gullible-ass "mofos."

In the same way it is best not to assign genius when there are more grounded explanations for success. I wouldn't assign to stupid that which can be explained by temperamental difference.

Everything you assigned to "trumpkins" although no doubt true in same cases can apply equally in other areas of politics to other sets of people regarding other politicians and policies. Only about 18% of actual Americans voted for Trump. Assuming only a 32% core base brings that down to 6%. Even in that small group the statical probability that they would signifgantly fall bellow the norm on intelligence or gullibility <1%. Chances are they are about average. Chances are your interest in politics puts you above average in intelligence especially in politcal knowledgeability though that also puts you at a higher then average probability of being swept up in certian political social manipulations[higher than average gullibility]. Chances are you give a lot more credit to supporters of your political causes than they are due credit and less to those you disagree.

End of the day. It is best to assume disagreement in policy or support of politicans has less to do with people moral character, intelligence or gullibility and more to do with their different culture, priorities, personal interests and temperament. You know measures that actualy are predictive of political postion.

 

[Captain America]

And yet I like Trump, and I am one of the hyper educated.

This is slander that people who like Trump Just Have To Be stupid.

Hawk, bro I know you think you're super smart and all that and you have got the world by the ass and a bong, but........

Not too sure the folks around here, who do read your posts, would agree. Just sayin'...

In fact, your post sort of validates the point that you call slander.

One man's reality is another man's slander I suppose.

 

[trouble13]

And whining about the Dems holding their line is? Have you seen the polls on this shutdown? Eventually McConnell is going to have to give in and allow a Senate vote on the Bills just passed in the House. At that point if Trump vetos his veto will be overturned. Nobody is going to give in for a stupid Wall that Trump could not even get past the Hill when he had Majorities in both Houses. Not happening.

Eventually Trump is going to declare it a national emergency and build the wall without Democrat support

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[<alt>doxygen]

And whining about the Dems holding their line is? Have you seen the polls on this shutdown? Eventually McConnell is going to have to give in and allow a Senate vote on the Bills just passed in the House. At that point if Trump vetos his veto will be overturned. Nobody is going to give in for a stupid Wall that Trump could not even get past the Hill when he had Majorities in both Houses. Not happening.

It wasn't an issue to Trump until the right wing media had a hissy fit.

Why Fox News Made Trump Shut Down the Government

 

[plutonium]

I'm still waiting for the promised border security that was offered in the 80's when Reagan made the Amnesty deal.

Still not there, still not coming.

Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.

If Trump gives in on this, the Dems will do what they ALWAYS do. Renege on the deal.

This is not a mystery to figure out. It's a certainty to be expected. Trump understands the reality and knows the game they are playing.

Trump has changed the game.

Excuse me boss.. but trump is a putin asset first.... we have bigger problems in this country about people dying than on the border .. prescripition drugs , heath care costs, crazy American killers, bad water, work the numbers of people dying ,, not the hate of Mexicans then we can put up a fence......thats what we need to work on first!!!

 

[humbolt]

Absolutely. An imposing physical border barrier, along with commensurate other proven effective measures, would indeed do exactly that.
Its time to effect this imposing physical border barrier, along with mandatory eVerify and further ICE deportations of illegal immigrants who are in country.
An 'all of the above' strategy. I'm not against it.

It's not difficult to do, and not expensive, either. What's missing is political will. For some, controlling immigration is simply an exercise in political rhetoric of the kind we've witnessed for decades now.

 

[Xelor]

Part I of II

numbers are important and they can give us a breakdown on how each party views a certain issue, subject, policy. Also those whom do not affiliate with either party. But as you stated or implied, it can't get inside their heads. I suppose if enough questions are asked, one could determine why.

Independents are usually my gauge in determining where middle America stands. Usually around 80-90% of republicans and democrats will back their party's stance on any issue or one could also apply that to a president of their party. Nothing new there. The border wall, 80% of republicans are for it, 77% of Democrats oppose it. Question 18. Very partisan and hard core stances when it comes to the two major parties.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/f0al8raalq/econTabReport.pdf

Independents, 34% for 45% against. That's probably in my view as to where middle America stands. A Plurality against the wall. It's also interesting 21% answered not sure or just don't give a dang. If you go to question 34A,B and C. Independents only, 39% blame Democrats in congress a lot, 38% blame Republicans in congress a lot, 56% blame Trump a lot. I left out a little, that kind of wishy washy. Trump's gets more of the blame, but every one gets some. That I think is what it should be.

One last thing with independents, middle America, the non-affiliated. Question 36, Needs to compromise. 32% say Democrats in congress, 19% Republicans in congress and 56% say President Trump. Not surprisingly, 76% of republicans say the democrats in congress need to compromise. 80% of Democrats say Trump needs to compromise.

This makes me wonder, what is a compromise between Trump and the Democrats, Schumer and Pelosi? Is it Trump gets his 5 billion and the Democrats nothing or is it Trump get nothing which is exactly what the Democrats want? Is there room to compromise between the two major parties? Are either willing to? 2.5 billion would split it right down the middle. Each side gives up 2.5 billion. I think at the moment this is personal, between Trump, Pelosi and Schumer along with their supporters.

Reagan and Tip O'Neal were always able to work out compromises on whatever subject, issue or policy. Particular SDI. But neither Tip nor Ronnie took political battles personal. Times have changed.

The rubric poll for this thread contains two intellectual foundation questions that provide a high level basis for the key inference I, in the narrative portion of my OP, made about Trumpkins. One of those questions I noted in the OP and the other I merely referred to but didn't replicate. Had those two questions not been part of the poll, I wouldn't have been able to, using the poll's responses, make the inference I did.


Red:
By "middle America," do you mean:

• Americans who reside anywhere other than the two main coasts?
  • I don't think this is what you mean, but I'm asking to be sure.
• "Middle ground" (something between Dem and GOP stated positions/approaches/outcomes), some might say "watered down," political stances with regard to "this and that" issue?

Blue:
That's to be expected.


Pink:

• Q 34 --> The question of who preponderantly deserves blame for a given status or outcome has an existentially accurate answer. It's a positive question.
• Q 18 --> This question is a normative one. Sure, rationally, one's answer to it must derive from one's calculus of whom to blame; one needs to know quite a lot about another's analysis of the totality of the topic to assess whether s/he has arrived at the existentially accurate answer to Q34. Absent that type of information, one's response to Q 18 just is what it is, a political or perhaps ethical data point. That piece of data informs one of what folks think, but it doesn't inform one of the quality of their thought, unless, of course, there's an obvious (given Western philosophical models) right/wrong stance.

(Cont'd due to character limit)

 

[Xelor]

Part II of II

....
This makes me wonder, what is a compromise between Trump and the Democrats, Schumer and Pelosi? Is it Trump gets his 5 billion and the Democrats nothing or is it Trump get nothing which is exactly what the Democrats want? Is there room to compromise between the two major parties? Are either willing to? 2.5 billion would split it right down the middle. Each side gives up 2.5 billion. I think at the moment this is personal, between Trump, Pelosi and Schumer along with their supporters.

Reagan and Tip O'Neal were always able to work out compromises on whatever subject, issue or policy. Particular SDI. But neither Tip nor Ronnie took political battles personal. Times have changed.

Tan and off-topic:
I'm indulging this question only because by your earlier substantive on-topic remarks, you've earned it...that said, I have no desire to here dwell on the wall/shutdown topic. I don't because the shutdown itself, and how it might be ended, is irrelevant to the thread topic. At your discretion, respond to my "tan" comments here, but know that in the interest of not deflecting this thread to another wall/shutdown "tirade," I won't reply to your response to this section...unless, of course, you materially connect your response to the thread's actual topic.
I don't think there is one. The only way out of the shutdown is for Congress to pass veto-proof appropriations.

• Trump's stance: I want my wall! I want my wall!
  • He would sooner have the government not function than have it function without funding for his wall.
  • Border security is priority one, and it's impossible to achieve without the wall.
  • In the "Chuck & Nancy" meeting:
    • Trump attended that meeting aiming to get funding for his wall, not to keep the gov't up and running.
    • Trump unequivocally said he'd be proud to close the gov't over his wall's funding.
• The Dems' stance: Our job and your job is to manage the government and keep it open so it can serve the American people.
  • The matter of wall funding must be decoupled from whether the government writ larger is funded or not funded.
  • Border security is priority one, and it's possible to achieve via myriad means.
  • In the "Chuck & Nancy" meeting:
    • Dems attended that meeting aiming to keep the gov't from shutting down, not to discuss wall funding.
    • Dems never wanted the gov't to shutdown.

Given those two positions, the amount of money to fund new border walling isn't a negotiating point. And, as you likely know, McConnell is the impediment to a veto-proof appropriations bill because his chamber already unanimously passed one such bill that he refuses to reintroduce.


Teal:

• I think it's personal for Trump. He's comportmentally authoritative; he's lived his life relying on force and formal functional authority to get his way. He's got an "us and them" world view.
• I don't think it's personal for Mrs. Pelosi. Nancy was born into a political family. As with any gov't official who realizes they serve, not rule, the people, she's long understood collaboration and has long since learned to separate one's politics from one's personhood.
• I don't know whether it's personal for Chuck, but I'm not inclined to think it is because he's a traditional politician and US senator. US senators are quite fraternal in their political ethos. They have their policy differences, but they generally respect one another, their political opposites as individuals who merely have a different point of view.

Orange:
In some quarters, yes. In others it only appears that way.

End of post pair.