US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Dowly

No one coming to the US now is eligible for DACA, therefore Trump is wrong in saying people are coming there to take advantage of DACA.

It's not his first mistake lol

[August]

Originally Posted by Dowly

You're the one who started arguing over it. Now that I showed you wrong, you back down, like you've done so many other times.

You have not showed me wrong. You're just creating your usual straw man argument to score points in some kind of weird game, one BTW that only you are playing.

My point remains completely valid and has nothing to do with the Environment.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Dowly

No one coming to the US now is eligible for DACA, therefore Trump is wrong in saying people are coming there to take advantage of DACA.

Yes he said they are flooding borders to take advantage of DACA. So what?

YOU said: To be eligible, recipients must have entered the United States before their 16th birthday and prior to June 2007[..]

My suggestion Mr. Kettle before you go off half-cocked again and accuse the Pot of being an idiot because of his remarks. You review your own 'TWEETS' regarding DACA so you don't make yourself out to be of comparable color. Because the June 2007 date is NOT entirely true. Instead of Wikipedia try reading our Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service website. Also just an FYI read the news it was expanded again to include the flood of child immigrants in 2014 too.

Also you may want to take into consideration the current flow of Central Americans migrating to the U.S via Mexico right now may very well be heading here to take advantage of DACA because they don't have a clue yet that it is no longer applicable to them. It's been implemented retroactively TWICE now (that I know of) and it may be again for the next bunch.

[Mr Quatro]

Seed thought that this could bust out into the open

https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/opi...ing/554571001/

Probe is about money laundering, not collusion

How do you tell the American people that they elected a president who was money laundering for the Russians? How do you tell the once rabidly anti-Communist Republican Party that they have become dopes for the kleptocrat(thief) Vladimir Putin in their desire for power?

[Buddahaid]

Trump is still a charlatan in my book, and an obvious one at that.

[em2nought]

This is extremely dangerous to our democracy Blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada

[Onkel Neal]

All so very true, too.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Yes he said they are flooding borders to take advantage of DACA. So what?

So what that he is incorrect in saying they would come here to take advantage of DACA since none of them are eligible for it.

YOU said: To be eligible, recipients must have entered the United States before their 16th birthday and prior to June 2007[..]

My suggestion Mr. Kettle before you go off half-cocked again and accuse the Pot of being an idiot because of his remarks. You review your own 'TWEETS' regarding DACA so you don't make yourself out to be of comparably the same color. Because the June 2007 date is NOT entirely true. Instead of Wikipedia try reading our Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service website.

Sure, let's look at USCIS' website then. Here are the guidelines:

1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;

2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;

3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;

4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;

5. Had no lawful status on June 15, 2012;

6. Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and

7. Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor,or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

Further, in the I-821D instructions form it says before listing the above guidelines that:
"[..]and that you meet all of the following:"

https://www.uscis.gov/system/files_f...-821dinstr.pdf

So, what exactly seems to be the problem?

Also just an FYI read the news it was expanded again to include the flood of child immigrants in 2014 too.

If you mean Obama's 2014 expansion, then I would return your advice of reading the USCIS' website:

Due to a federal court order, USCIS will not begin accepting requests for the expansion of DACA on February 18, 2015, as originally planned and has suspended implementation of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents. The court's temporary injunction, issued February 16, 2015, does not affect the existing DACA. Individuals may continue to come forward and request an initial grant of DACA or renewal of DACA under the original guidelines. Please check back for updates.

https://www.uscis.gov/archive/2014-e...mmigration#top

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Trump is still a charlatan in my book, and an obvious one at that.

absolutely and an egomaniac, a blowhard and clearly unqualified for the job, but what does it say about American Democracy that the only choice in November 2016 was between Trump and Clinton and 63 million voters thought Trump was the better candidate.

Despite all the fire and fury from the left over Trump, his administration has been very typically conservative, most of the day to day policies have been very much in line with what previous republican administrations have done.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by August

You have not showed me wrong. You're just creating your usual straw man argument to score points in some kind of weird game, one BTW that only you are playing.

Yes, it is the one titled "Counter BS with facts (2018 edition)".
Though, I wouldn't say I'm the only one playing it, but the playerbase has seen a definite decline during the past year or so which is a shame.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

...and clearly unqualified for the job...

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
-United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5

That's it. According to the people who wrote the Constitution those are the only qualifications required. If you meant that you think he is unsuited for the job, then I agree. On the other hand we're more than 1/4 of the way into his first term and the country isn't much different than it was a year ago, despite all the venom he's garnered. Only time will tell how it turns out in the end.

[Mr Quatro]

I'll say this about President Trump ... He's better than Mrs Santa Claus

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Dowly

If you mean Obama's 2014 expansion, then I would return your advice of reading the USCIS' website:
https://www.uscis.gov/archive/2014-e...mmigration#top

Then how do you account for the 122,000 initial DACA requests in 2014? I'll tell you mr. Kettle, because executive action permitted it before the courts shut it down. Like I said it has been taken advantage of twice that I know of. And Id wager the current population heading our way via mexico probably has every intention of takeing advantage of it again.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Then how do you account for the 122,000 initial DACA requests in 2014? I'll tell you mr. Kettle, because executive action permitted it before the courts shut it down. Like I said it has been taken advantage of twice that I know of. And Id wager the current population heading our way via mexico probably has every intention of takeing advantage of it again.

The program ran from 2012 until September 5th of 2017. During that time anyone who was eligible could apply for DACA.

On Sept. 5, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated the orderly phase out of the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Read the memorandum from Acting DHS Secretary Elaine Duke for details.

USCIS will adjudicate, on an individual, case by case basis:

- Properly filed pending DACA initial requests and associated EAD applications that USCIS accepted as of Sept. 5, 2017.

- Properly filed pending DACA renewal requests and associated EAD applications that USCIS accepted as of Sept. 5, 2017.

- Properly filed pending DACA renewal requests and associated EAD applications from DACA recipients whose DACA and EAD expire between Sept. 5, 2017, and March 5, 2018, that we accepted on or before Oct. 5, 2017. USCIS will consider DACA requests received from residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico on a case-by-case basis.

Source: https://www.uscis.gov/daca2017

There were initial DACA requests in 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 as well:
2015: 84,883
2016: 73,350
2017: 45,645
2018: 164

Source: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...ort_4.2.18.pdf

I think you are mistaking the June 2012 as the deadline?

EDIT: Oh, and Obama's 2014 expansion says:

Have lived in the United States continuously since at least January 1, 2010, rather than the prior requirement of June 15, 2007

Source: https://www.uscis.gov/archive/2014-e...ns-immigration

So, people coming there in 2014 would not have been eligible anyways.

EDIT2: Added more up-to-date figures for initial requests above.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

absolutely and an egomaniac, a blowhard and clearly unqualified for the job, but what does it say about American Democracy that the only choice in November 2016 was between Trump and Clinton and 63 million voters thought Trump was the better candidate.

2016 was truly a race to the bottom of the barrel. These two candidates were supposed to represent the best of the best of the best that each of the parties could come up with? Really??

Hillary's legacy is being probably the only candidate that could lose against a buffoon like Trump. I sincerely believe that if the DNC had nominated pretty much any other democratic candidate that the election would have turned out differently.

On the other hand, if the RNC would have nominated someone other than Trump. I don't think the election would have changed.

The DNC putting Hillary up was worse than the RNC putting up Palin. At least the RNC could claim that they did not know how bad Palin would be.

The DNC knew full well all the baggage and the public opinion of Hillary. Whether it was deserved or undeserved is not important. Hillary had a poor image with a large portion of the population. She ran a weak campaign that did not improve her perception with large numbers of Americans.

Putting her up was a risky and poor decision.

I think that a lot of people did not vote for Trump, but voted against Hillary.

The Republicans did not win the election in 2016, the Democrats lost it.

The same can happen in 2018 and it sure can happen in 2020 if the democrats are not careful.

Kerry could not win on a platform of "I am not Bush". Whoever the DNC nominates had better have a platform a lot more than "I am not Trump".