Will “mass deportation” actually happen (6 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

It’s so repulsive to see people cheering for what is basically 80% the same thing as the Holocaust - different end result but otherwise very similar.

Economists have said it would tank the economy and cause inflation - notwithstanding the cost.

Is it going to actually happen or is this Build The Wall 2.0?

 

[TampaJoe]

Nobody is arguing that, nobody has been arguing that, and it's not a thing that is actually happening, ffs.

Dragon and MT have made the exact points I was going for. Undocumented immigrants pay taxes at the federal and state level despite receiving none of that in direct benefits (EBT, Medicare, etc). They pay more taxes when they spend money at the store. In total, undocumented immigrants contribute more to the economy than they receive. They are a net positive for the economy, and that is a fact.

Instead of demonizing and vilifying, perhaps we should find ways to integrate them into society, since they clearly want to be here and contribute. They chose to come to this country and work in this country and contribute to this country. That's the American Dream. Maybe welcome your neighbors and love them instead of being butt crevasses to them.

We have immigration laws. So they either mean something or they don’t. That is demonizing no one. If you don’t like or agree with the law, there is a process for that. Ignoring the law is not a solution.

As for those migrants who have deportation orders or who have been charged and/or convicted of felonies or those who associate with criminal organizations, or those who have been deported and have reentered the US illegally, if you want to argue to let them stay, that is up to you. I don’t agree with you nor do I think the majority voters agree with you. Finally, if you think that we need to ignore existing law because you believe the numbers work, I don’t think the vast majority of folks agree with that either.

We are either a nation of laws or we are not. You can decide I guess for yourself.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

And as far as I’m concerned you destroy your credibility when you pretend Biden’s border policies or lack thereof had nothing to do at all with the hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants that flooded this country during his administration.

Nobody believes that. Except maybe folks on this board.

All this wouldn't b

We have immigration laws. So they either mean something or they don’t. That is demonizing no one. If you don’t like or agree with the law, there is a process for that. Ignoring the law is not a solution.

As for those migrants who have deportation orders or who have been charged and/or convicted of felonies or those who associate with criminal organizations, or those who have been deported and have reentered the US illegally, if you want to argue to let them stay, that is up to you. I don’t agree with you nor do I think the majority voters agree with you. Finally, if you think that we need to ignore existing law because you believe the numbers work, I don’t think the vast majority of folks agree with that either.

We are either a nation of laws or we are not. You can decide I guess for yourself.

The problem is that this is being carried out by someone convicted of 34 felonies and pardoned people who beat up cops. Obviously this isn’t about some noble intention to uphold the law.

Try substituting jaywalkers for illegal immigrants. Jaywalking is a crime. There’s a reason it’s illegal. Now tell me if someone ran in a platform of spending billions of dollars and throwing people into vans by masked agents to crack down on jaywalkers. It would be ridiculous right?

That’s a very simplistic way of explaining why some of us find this idea of “we’re doing this because of the law” hollow. The people doing this aren’t that concerned with the law and we as a society ding go crazy with the enforcement of every law

 

[TampaJoe]

All this wouldn't b


The problem is that this is being carried out by someone convicted of 34 felonies and pardoned people who beat up cops. Obviously this isn’t about some noble intention to uphold the law.

Try substituting jaywalkers for illegal immigrants. Jaywalking is a crime. There’s a reason it’s illegal. Now tell me if someone ran in a platform of spending billions of dollars and throwing people into vans by masked agents to crack down on jaywalkers. It would be ridiculous right?

That’s a very simplistic way of explaining why some of us find this idea of “we’re doing this because of the law” hollow. The people doing this aren’t that concerned with the law and we as a society ding go crazy with the enforcement of every law

This isn’t jaywalking. Jaywalkers aren’t really a problem. They don’t strain our infrastructure. That is a lame arse analogy.

I’m all for working towards a resolution. I’m all for finding a way for most of these folks to remain in the country and work legally. I’m also all for doing away with sanctuary city and sanctuary states. State and local governments should not be working at odds against the Feds.

So if we need legislation then let’s be about legislation.

 

[SamAndreas]

This isn’t jaywalking. Jaywalkers aren’t really a problem. They don’t strain our infrastructure. That is a lame arse analogy.

I’m all for working towards a resolution. I’m all for finding a way for most of these folks to remain in the country and work legally. I’m also all for doing away with sanctuary city and sanctuary states. State and local governments should not be working at odds against the Feds.

So if we need legislation then let’s be about legislation.

Joe, where are you going to find enough agreeable minded people for that?

 

[MT15]

This isn’t jaywalking. Jaywalkers aren’t really a problem. They don’t strain our infrastructure. That is a lame arse analogy.

I’m all for working towards a resolution. I’m all for finding a way for most of these folks to remain in the country and work legally. I’m also all for doing away with sanctuary city and sanctuary states. State and local governments should not be working at odds against the Feds.

So if we need legislation then let’s be about legislation.

Yet you voted for people who killed the best legislation in at least a decade. So your assertion that you want legislation is just more posturing.

 

[MT15]

 

[cuddlemonkey]

We have immigration laws. So they either mean something or they don’t. That is demonizing no one. If you don’t like or agree with the law, there is a process for that. Ignoring the law is not a solution.

As for those migrants who have deportation orders or who have been charged and/or convicted of felonies or those who associate with criminal organizations, or those who have been deported and have reentered the US illegally, if you want to argue to let them stay, that is up to you. I don’t agree with you nor do I think the majority voters agree with you. Finally, if you think that we need to ignore existing law because you believe the numbers work, I don’t think the vast majority of folks agree with that either.

We are either a nation of laws or we are not. You can decide I guess for yourself.

We are a nation of immigrants and you are a person who votes for unserious politicians who kill viable immigration reform bills, so peddle your bullshirt somewhere else.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

This isn’t jaywalking. Jaywalkers aren’t really a problem. They don’t strain our infrastructure. That is a lame arse analogy.

I’m all for working towards a resolution. I’m all for finding a way for most of these folks to remain in the country and work legally. I’m also all for doing away with sanctuary city and sanctuary states. State and local governments should not be working at odds against the Feds.

So if we need legislation then let’s be about legislation.

Neither do immigrants. We are the richest nation on earth. There is zero reason for us to lack infrastructure.

 

[TampaJoe]

Neither do immigrants. We are the richest nation on earth. There is zero reason for us to lack infrastructure.

And yet we do.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

And yet we do.

Think about it, Joe. Think about infrastructure bills and which party tends to support them and which party tends to oppose them.

 

[TampaJoe]

We are a nation of immigrants and you are a person who votes for unserious politicians who kill viable immigration reform bills, so peddle your bullshirt somewhere else.

Yeah and you vote for unserious politicians as well. That’s the problem. So your serious politicians lose on one bill and then lose an election. What’s next? Where do you go from here. All you have to offer is that you aren’t Trump. That was the vast majority of the campaign that you lost.

So where do we go from here? Nobody has solved immigration for decades. Across multiple administrations. So we can keep trying or follow your lead and whine.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Yeah and you vote for unserious politicians as well. That’s the problem. So your serious politicians lose on one bill and then lose an election. What’s next? Where do you go from here. All you have to offer is that you aren’t Trump. That was the vast majority of the campaign that you lost.

So where do we go from here? Nobody has solved immigration for decades. Across multiple administrations. So we can keep trying or follow your lead and whine.

As opposed to the GOP plan which is to otherize and terrorize instead of actually working with others to address the problem. The last time a bipartisan bill was on the table, Donald Trump told the GOP to kill it and they all voted against it, including both senators from Florida.

Next time you want to talk about how this should be done via legislation, remember which party killed the legislation.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Lets be very clear, the GOP are not interested in just stopping or deporting "illegals", they have moved on to their true goal of eliminating immigrants of a certain persuasion...PERIOD! If a legal immigrant exercise their RIGHTS or express personal opinions that don't align with the GOP's views, then those opinions are deemed illegal which makes them deportable...PERIOD!

Now we can add this to the GOP agenda:


The GOP has convinced their base that illegals vote, collect Medicaid and collect Social Security.

 

[TampaJoe]

As opposed to the GOP plan which is to otherize and terrorize instead of actually working with others to address the problem. The last time a bipartisan bill was on the table, Donald Trump told the GOP to kill it and they all voted against it, including both senators from Florida.

Next time you want to talk about how this should be done via legislation, remember which party killed the legislation.

I recall. So where do we go from here? The polling on the Dem border policy pretty much sucked. It was a major issue in the last election. So what changes are they making or are we to expect a repeat of the policies that were rejected last time?

What you might want to remember is how unpopular the last administrations border policy was.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

What you might want to remember is how unpopular the last administrations border policy was.

You might want to remember that, despite the GOP shouting they have a MANDATE, POTUS received only 49% of the votes. Also, despite holding both chambers of Congress, the GOP represents far fewer PEOPLE than Democrats. Perhaps they should try to govern in an inclusive manner.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I recall. So where do we go from here? The polling on the Dem border policy pretty much sucked. It was a major issue in the last election. So what changes are they making or are we to expect a repeat of the policies that were rejected last time?

What you might want to remember is how unpopular the last administrations border policy was.

The polling sucked? That's where you want to go with this, as you ignore the fact that a bill that worked to address the border issue- an issue that you claim to view with such importance- was publicly killed by Trump to deny Democrats something to campaign on. The same guy who killed this bill is being supported by the very senators you voted for. You are laughably forking transparent, Joe. Either that, or you are genuinely unable to follow the logical throughline of this conversation.

 

[bird]

This isn’t jaywalking. Jaywalkers aren’t really a problem. They don’t strain our infrastructure. That is a lame arse analogy.

I’m all for working towards a resolution. I’m all for finding a way for most of these folks to remain in the country and work legally. I’m also all for doing away with sanctuary city and sanctuary states. State and local governments should not be working at odds against the Feds.

So if we need legislation then let’s be about legislation.

Immigrants don’t strain our infrastructure. If our infrastructure, whatever you mean by that, gets strained it is caused by our system.

 

[TampaJoe]

You might want to remember that, despite the GOP shouting they have a MANDATE, POTUS received only 49% of the votes. Also, despite holding both chambers of Congress, the GOP represents far fewer PEOPLE than Democrats. Perhaps they should try to govern in an inclusive manner.

I would agree there was no mandate. What you say is true. What is also true is that despite all that, Dems lost. They were polling behind on many of the major issues.

So the question is what if anything would they change. Or does nothing come to mind?