The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
538: "Trump’s Hardline Immigration Stance Got Him to the White House"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight:

Trump’s Hardline Immigration Stance Got Him To The White House

SEP. 12, 2017 AT 5:59 AM

That may overwhelm the popularity of DACA as far as Republicans in Congress are concerned.

By Harry Enten and Perry Bacon Jr.

… A DACA-like bill could be approved by Congress. But there’s a big force in the way: Anti-immigration sentiment in the Republican Party. DACA may be popular, even among some Republicans, but hardline immigration policy has been growing as an animating force in GOP politics for years. It helped put Trump in the White House.

So looking only at the polling on DACA can be misleading if you’re trying to gauge the chances that the Republican-controlled Congress will replace the program. …

Immigration is similar to guns in that the Democratic position on many specific immigration policy questions is more popular than the Republican position, but Republicans hold their own on immigration more generally. Much of Trump’s immigration agenda doesn’t poll well: For instance, there isn’t broad support for building a border wall with Mexico, limiting legal immigration or ending DACA. However, recent surveys from George Washington University and Morning Consult found that Democrats and Republicans tend to poll evenly when it comes to which party is trusted more to handle immigration.

Additionally, immigration tends to be an issue that is more important to Republicans than Democrats. The 2016 national exit poll found that Trump beat Hillary Clinton by 31 percentage points among voters who said immigration was the most important issue facing the country. The 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study found that 73 percent of Trump voters said immigration was of “very high importance” to them, compared with 24 percent of Clinton voters. And despite Trump’s rhetoric on immigration and Latinos during the 2016 campaign, he probably did no worse among them than Mitt Romney did in 2012. (And he may have done slightly better.)

So even though DACA is popular, Republicans would be unlikely to face a backlash among their voters — even their more centrist ones — should they refuse to pass a replacement.

Indeed, Republican members of Congress could face a backlash if they pass one — in the form of primary challenges. In recent elections, a hardline stance on immigration has proved to be a winner in Republican primaries. It has been highly correlated with how well GOP senators have done against primary challenges — senators with more hardline positions have done better against primary challengers; those with more moderate views have done worse.

In 2016, moreover, immigration may have been the issue most responsible for Trump’s winning the Republican nomination. In every state with a caucus or primary exit poll, he did best among voters who said immigration was their top issue.

 
Hide 211 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. guest says:

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that’s not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he’s partly right because that’s what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    …wait for it…

    Hillary.

    That’s “what happened.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Declane
    Hillary allowed Trump to beat 16 other Republicans? Really?

    People seem so confused about why Trump won. It's the economy. Immigration is a huge part of that. We're already strengthening our trade deals. Next we build a wall.

    It's going to happen and it's going to be glorious. We've got a couple of decades of growth ahead of us until the globalists force another civil war. Enjoy it while it lasts.
    , @Ed
    Immigration is got him the primary win though, that's the point.
    , @dr kill
    So this article forced me to check out the 538 blog. Seems like a 75 % sports book. I'd like them to predict when I'm having power restored so I know how much more diesel to purchase.
    , @Alec Leamas

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.
     
    IIRC, it went up to 99.999% when Trump won Pennsylvania and Michigan (I could be conflating with NYT's "Predictor.")

    It's really stupid to handicap what is essentially a binary contest that is the product of future choices made by people in the same way you would a boxing match or horse race.

    One candidate had a 100% chance of winning and the other a 0% chance. Any play is just a hedge for the potential error in the polls in swing states. All the polls had H-> winning all of the swing states and cruising to victory.

    But Silver knows that the polls could be wrong in their sampling, etc. So he has to give Trump some chance of winning so that he can pretend that Trump just beat the odds due to a series of unlikely events instead of polling (and Silver's schtick) being flawed. He has to hedge like the Great Oz behind the curtain to keep the faith of the leftist sociology majors that makeup his audience and believe that he's using SCIENCE!11!!!!
    , @The preferred nomenclature is...
    72% wrong.
    , @RCB
    Suppose I tell you that the probability of flipping a coin twice and getting heads both times is 25%.

    Suppose you then flip a coin twice, and you get heads both times.

    Was I wrong?
    , @larry lurker
    I think it was an iSteve commenter who put it this way a few months back: "It's as if your weatherman said there was a 30% chance of rain today ... and it rains."

    I used this analogy recently with an acquaintance who was upset at Silver's giving Trump 28% odds when he obviously should have had 100% odds, and he sneered: "So let me get this straight: You're saying Nate Silver is about as reliable as a weatherman?"

    "Well, yeah. They're not fortune tellers." We moved on.

    , @AnotherDad

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.
     
    That was quite a reasonable estimate for Trump in the closing stages of this election.

    My personal math--not that anyone cares--had Trump winning 260 or 264 and needing Wisconsin to win. I would have given Trump's odds in that same 1/3 ballpark. Trump got Wisconsin ... *and* Pennsylvania and Michigan. Impressive. But still a razor thin win by < 1% in three states that could have slipped out with the most minor fluctuation in perception of either candidate.

    The plain fact was this was a very difficult election to call. Because both candidates had high negatives and because the press had picked out one candidate--Trump--as their bete noire, beyond the pale, which meant there was an even greater chance of Trump supporters ducking/lying-to pollsters and also a counter-reaction effect to stick it to the highly disliked alternative.

    The key point here is that Silver/538, kept saying Trump's got a decent shot to win this thing, even while huge numbers of pollsters and pontificators were blabbing how it was all over, Hillary was a mortal lock, blah, blah, blah.

    What most certainly did not happen was some sort of Trumpian landslide that Silver/538 and everyone else missed. I think that was possible post-Obama--especially against the crappy and unpleasant Hillary--but would have required a nationalist candidate as energetic, but far more articulate and disciplined than Trump.
    , @Anonymous
    How about this whopper:

    "Much of Trump’s immigration agenda doesn’t poll well: For instance, there isn’t broad support for building a border wall with Mexico, limiting legal immigration or ending DACA."

    This is why I don't bother with liberal media sources for my facts. It's just bs built on lies, omissions and distortions, buttressed by a mountain of cash.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/538-trumps-hardline-immigration-stance-got-him-to-the-white-house/#comment-2005923
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Yes we know, Trump can be a hero. The people presented Trump a golden opportunity for historic glory. Or a one term POTUS, hated by his former supporters in addition to all those that would hate him even if he cured cancer, which is a hell of a lot of people. It’s clear enough what must be done and amnesty is off the damn table. Next up, birthright citizenship, H1B visas, and limiting immigration to attractive white women from Europe that need protection from monsters like Angela Merkel and Merkel’s Moslem men.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    We inow what must be done, but it doesn't look as if Donald Trump knows. He acts as if he hasn't a clue about why people voted for him.
    , @Kevin C.

    birthright citizenship
     
    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that's especially difficult to accomplish. But then, it's not like it's really possible to get any of the other things on your list. And it's not just Trump; any other person in his position would prove equally powerless. Because the "Deep State" rules, and no mere president, or Congress, has the power to stop them, the absolute Lords of America.
    , @Pat Boyle
    I have a vision of a TV special from the late twenty first century on the politics of the early twenty first century.

    "Today lets us recall former President Donald Trump. He is now known principally as the first major world leader to build a wall. Nowadays in 2083, of course, all nations have surrounding walls. It's hard to imagine how any nation could have survived the population explosion of mid-century from Africa and South America without strong walls and the will to sink migrants in boats".

    " He will be remembered as the one man who showed us a way to survive the onslaught of third world paupers that nearly sank civilization."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Declane says:
    @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    Hillary allowed Trump to beat 16 other Republicans? Really?

    People seem so confused about why Trump won. It’s the economy. Immigration is a huge part of that. We’re already strengthening our trade deals. Next we build a wall.

    It’s going to happen and it’s going to be glorious. We’ve got a couple of decades of growth ahead of us until the globalists force another civil war. Enjoy it while it lasts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "Hillary allowed Trump to beat out 16 other Republicans? Really?"

    I'm not sure you know how presidential elections work. Trump could've bested 16 billion Republicans. If he doesn't beat out his general election opponent(s), he doesn't get to the White House.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Ed says:

    Immigration is one of those issues that can trip you up as a Republican. The media loves it and it appears to poll well but once something is suggested the backlash begins. Folks were already posting numbers to call their congressmen after this supposed deal leaked.

    It’s very difficult to win GOP primaries being for amnesty. Flake is plummeting in the polls to the point some are openly wondering if he should even bother running or just declare he’s an independent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Frau Katze
    The elite cannot accept that a majority of people are not supportive of mass immigration. Much less illegal immigration.

    They seem to be in some kind of denial.

    But nothing has changed with time or even the country. Throughout the West, mass immigration was imposed on the population. Who then became more and more disenchanted as time went on.

    Why can't they see the obvious?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Ed says:
    @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    Immigration is got him the primary win though, that’s the point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "Immigration got him the primary win though, that's the point"

    Then why did the headline say it's what got Trump to the White House instead of to the nomination?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. dr kill says:
    @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    So this article forced me to check out the 538 blog. Seems like a 75 % sports book. I’d like them to predict when I’m having power restored so I know how much more diesel to purchase.

    Read More
    • LOL: AndrewR
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. DACA is “popular” …. Which means the lefties at 538 and their fellow sjw pinheads like it.

    DACA is popular…but Trump’s “hardline” position won him the presidency. Yeah got it

    Geezus do these mental midgets ever think before they hit the send button. The mental gymnastic contortions these dumbasses go through blows their cranial circuitry.

    And dont they know they need to use the word “crackdown” in these hit pieces?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    And dont they know they need to use the word “crackdown” in these hit pieces?
     
    Crackdown, strongman, and living in a compound. Those are the big ones from the cntrl-left style book.
    , @International Jew
    They probably think DACA is popular because people will say "yes" to a pollster who asks "Should children be torn out of their parents' arms and exiled?"

    The result would be different if DACA were represented more fairly, eg "Should the US welcome illegal immigrants who say they are under 35, and furthermore claim, without proof, that their parents brought them here when they were 16 or less?"

    Same with gun control. "Should unstable individuals have ready access to Browning Machine Guns placed on hills overlooking preschools" vs "Should any civilians, other than criminals, be allowed to own guns?"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Someone remind 2017 Trump of this

    No doubt the usual suspects will be by to talk about how this is 88 dimensional chess or something

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    No the usual suspects will be taking a wait and see approach versus hysterically overreacting and eeyoring on about betrayal because Bannon's Blog makes YET ANOTHER claim that Trump is passing amnesty.
    , @Ron Mexico
    "88 dimensional chess" No, just 4D, but appreciate the double 8's
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Meanwhile, back at the ranch : Trump hit TWITTER this morning, in bigly fashion. Yesterday’s DACA “deal” with Chuck Schumer & senile Pelosi may not be a deal after all. If the 2 million strong and gray-haired DACA kids get their GOP Amnesty, there will have to be a 15 billion dollar appropriation for The Wall or a permanent reduction in “legal” immigration. No deal with The Trumpster is ever final until the ink is dry.

    Long story short : if Trump signs DACA as a “stand-alone,” which is to say that he gets nothing in return for signing a flat out Amnesty bill (see above), his Presidency will end up as a smoldering pile of burnt toast. Many empty seats at the next Trump rally, bigly, really bigly.

    Meanwhile, back in the darkest recesses of the US House of Representatives : Paul Ryan is shitting bricks. Ryan may want DACA as a “stand-alone” with all his heart and soul, but if he rams a “clean” DACA bill through with Dem. votes and a few Rep. RINOs, Wisconsin’s Eddie Munster will be out of a job and will be forced to ask his rich wife for the keys, every time he wants to take the family limo out for a spin!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dump Trump

    Meanwhile, back in the darkest recesses of the US House of Representatives : Paul Ryan is shitting bricks. Ryan may want DACA as a “stand-alone” with all his heart and soul, but if he rams a “clean” DACA bill through with Dem. votes and a few Rep. RINOs, Wisconsin’s Eddie Munster will be out of a job and will be forced to ask his rich wife for the keys, every time he wants to take the family limo out for a spin!
     
    I wouldn't bet on it. Wisconsinites are a bunch of cucks who elected this POS umpteen times in the first place. They went for Obama in 2012.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. jb says:

    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don’t understand why it isn’t happening already.

    By “well considered” I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can’t be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible “path to citizenship” might even be left open, as long as it wasn’t automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn’t bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    Read More
    • Agree: 415 reasons
    • Replies: @Dump Trump

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible “path to citizenship” might even be left open, as long as it wasn’t automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn’t bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries.
     
    Brilliant. But I wouldn't hold my breath for Trump to do this. He's dumber than a box of rocks. Even immigrant/refugee hugging Paul Ryan rejected the plan holding out for better border security, that just tells you how bad this deal is.

    The IQ of America just collectively dropped by another 10 points today. We are inching ever closer to Mexico's level of IQ. In fact pretty soon Mexico's IQ could be higher than ours, as they continue to dump their illiterate fruit pickers and gang members on us.

    Today's the day Trump stuck a fork in America. We have finally passed the point of no return.

    , @Opinionator
    Some very good ideas here. But it seems like more than the RAISE Act should be coming the other way. DACA is the only obvious bargaining chip Americans have. And RAISE Act itself is weak sauce. They should ask for everything now--all of it is reasonable and can be made broadly compelling with good advocacy--and put the anti-borders forces to the choice of screwing Dreamers.
    , @Bill Jones
    "They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. "

    Nonsensense. Where is the moral argument that children get to keep what their parents stole.
    , @Ed
    That's the deal I envisioned in January. He even said it at a press gaggle the day DACA expiration was announced.

    The good news is no deal is actually in existence & the GOP is livid.
    , @RadicalCenter
    And as soon as a Dem or establishment Republican wins the White House -- possibly 2020 and likely 2024 at latest -- every one of those illegal aliens ("dreamers") whom we let stay here as part of that deal, would be granted citizenship after all.
    , @gregor
    "DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn’t bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries."

    This is a great idea. But is the RAISE Act actually a hard quota system? My impression is that the 50% eventual reduction is just projected with the drop in family reunification claims. As far as I know, they aren't proposing fixed limits by country. Or are they?

    "The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation."

    Eh, it is their strongest point, but at the same time there is a reason no country in the world gives citizenship to people that enter illegally as minors.

    , @guest
    An argument so compelling that I don't remember it being a real political issue until after Obama's drastic, illegal, unilateral action. Oh, there were cries of "won't someone please think of the children!," as usual. But think about it. Cucked Congress after cucked Congress did nothing about it. Do you remember the nightly news badgering them to act? I don't.

    I remember some stories of poor kids in turmoil before Obama took action, but nothing like the MSM's standard moral crusades. Now suddenly after DACA becomes law it's an unanswerable moral issue? Smacks of rationalization. Especially combined with the fact that--like border fences and walls--it's not an issue in the rest of the world.

    Plus, I don't find it a compelling moral argument. Not any more than the idea that Bernie Madoff's sons should've been allowed to keep his ill-gained riches.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @Anonymous
    Someone remind 2017 Trump of this

    No doubt the usual suspects will be by to talk about how this is 88 dimensional chess or something

    No the usual suspects will be taking a wait and see approach versus hysterically overreacting and eeyoring on about betrayal because Bannon’s Blog makes YET ANOTHER claim that Trump is passing amnesty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    Nobody cares about what Breitbart says, what Coulter says or what Chuck and Nancy say. We DO care about about what Trump says and this morning Trump said explicitly, amnesty and no wall. His spokespeople all confirmed the same.

    I know that Chuck and Nancy are lying about the agreement they claim to have, but I also know from Trump's own words that he wants to sell us out on this one. By all accounts, he wanted to pass amnesty after getting elected and had to be talked out of it by Grassley and Cornyn, that is how weak Trump's instincts are on immigration.

    The guy has no ideological center and is just a liability to us at this point. We need to get rid of him as soon as possible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Jake says:

    And the Republican power brokers hate that as much as do the Democrats.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Steve,
    I understand why you posted this and the Trumpy Brown wiff post. Why you don’t you lay off new posts for a while and leave these near the top of the line-up in case your readers on the inside didn’t check in today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    There were two big issues related to immigration in the election.

    1. Mexican workers
    2. Muslim refugees

    Americans by and large aren’t terribly bothered by Mexican immigrants. In fact Trump’s prejudice towards Mexicans probably alienated a lot of whites especially in California where he lost the white vote. A lot of CA whites in the lower 3/4 of the income pyramid probably have Hispanics in the extended family and that made them feel personally offended when Trump denigrated Mexicans.

    Banning Muslims refugees makes sense to just about everyone. At least 90% of the country if not 95% don’t want Muslim refugees.

    If Democrats want to win, they should favor Christian refugees from the Middle East based on the rationale that they are protecting a minority group.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. @Buck Turgidson
    DACA is "popular" .... Which means the lefties at 538 and their fellow sjw pinheads like it.

    DACA is popular...but Trump's "hardline" position won him the presidency. Yeah got it

    Geezus do these mental midgets ever think before they hit the send button. The mental gymnastic contortions these dumbasses go through blows their cranial circuitry.

    And dont they know they need to use the word "crackdown" in these hit pieces?

    And dont they know they need to use the word “crackdown” in these hit pieces?

    Crackdown, strongman, and living in a compound. Those are the big ones from the cntrl-left style book.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
    "controversial"
    "maverick"
    "extreme"
    on and on
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Possibly the headline was there to get readers, who think “That’s right, let me read the details”, and then you get to the complete BS of his his “details”.

    Speaking of the details, I’ve not been following it all, and I had thought the ending of DACA was a done deal. Man, I know this is MUCH better than the alternative (as written about yesterday), but this guy just doesn’t give me any confidence that he meant anything he said, or he meant it, but has zero concentration and ability to keep his word.

    I don’t want freakin’ Art of the Deal on and on. Just do the things that you have the power to do!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
    No "deals" Mr Trump! Every time there is a "deal" on Capitol Hill, the American people get rolled. It's always schumer et al getting their stuff right now, then the other parts of the "agreement" things that maybe they will get around too later.

    1986 Amnesty Deal: "We'll implement this amnesty but they you have Congress' promise that there never will be another amnesty."

    Remember that "deal"? Neither does schumer.

    Tired of getting rolled by congressional deals, just enforce the immigration laws, build the wall, enact a moratorium. I thought Trump was going to put America first, not illegal aliens who have been ripping us off for decades.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    IIRC, it went up to 99.999% when Trump won Pennsylvania and Michigan (I could be conflating with NYT’s “Predictor.”)

    It’s really stupid to handicap what is essentially a binary contest that is the product of future choices made by people in the same way you would a boxing match or horse race.

    One candidate had a 100% chance of winning and the other a 0% chance. Any play is just a hedge for the potential error in the polls in swing states. All the polls had H-> winning all of the swing states and cruising to victory.

    But Silver knows that the polls could be wrong in their sampling, etc. So he has to give Trump some chance of winning so that he can pretend that Trump just beat the odds due to a series of unlikely events instead of polling (and Silver’s schtick) being flawed. He has to hedge like the Great Oz behind the curtain to keep the faith of the leftist sociology majors that makeup his audience and believe that he’s using SCIENCE!11!!!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    72% wrong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. People “like” DACA because they’ve bought the line of BS that all “Dreamers” are well-adapted high-school or college students who were brought here as toddlers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gregor
    I came across a particularly aggressive example of DACA boosterism recently in the Atlantic. The article is about DACA medical students.

    I reached Marina Di Bartolo, an internal-medicine doctor at the University of Pennsylvania, on her walk home from the clinic on Thursday. That day, she treated a patient with high blood pressure, another who needed cataract surgery, and someone with a herniated disc from bungee jumping gone wrong. “Not the most glamorous stuff,” she said.

    Di Bartolo’s parents brought her from Venezuela at age 7, then overstayed their tourist visas. Her mother works as a babysitter and housekeeper, and her father does odd jobs and construction.
     

    Very representative, I'm sure. But even in these examples cherry-picked for maximal sympathy, there are still several points that will make anyone but the most committed lib raise an eyebrow.

    Meanwhile, the United States faces a shortage of up to 104,900 physicians, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

    Di Bartolo won a full scholarship to the Yale School of Medicine, and to Princeton before that. But for students who rely on financial aid, the end of DACA would mean they can no longer afford school for a simple reason: Few banks are eager to lend to students legally prohibited from working after graduation.

    “I won’t be able to pay my living expenses, much less my tuition” without loans, said Cesar Montolongo, a professorial MD-Ph.D. student at Loyola-Stritch School of Medicine in Chicago. Montolongo spends his days in a brightly lit lab researching the root causes of urinary tract infections. “It’s bittersweet to have found something you’re happy doing, knowing it might be taken away,” he said.

    Sunny Nakae, the dean of admissions at Loyola-Stritch, said students face “a huge chasm of uncertainty.” Loyola was the first school to actively recruit undocumented students, and has admitted about 30. But even though DACA has been under threat since President Trump’s election, Nakae said she has received more applications from undocumented students this year than ever before.
     

    There may well be a shortage of doctors, but it's more due to restricted residencies not because of a lack of suitable medical school candidates. Either Marina et al are real superstars or more likely illegal aliens are getting affirmative action and receiving massively subsidized educations as they displace better qualified native candidates. Giving coveted med school slots and scholarships to illegals is pure clown world. Let me see the polling on that.

    Moreover, we are supposed to pretend this is typical and that there's no way any of the dreamers could be gangbangers, dropouts, single moms, welfare sponges, etc. And of course amnesty would never incentivize more illegal immigration. Trust us this time.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/09/daca-med-students-face-uncertain-futures/538695/

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. eah says:

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    https://twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/908162960165687296
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. eah says:
    @eah
    https://twitter.com/WillBWindsor/status/908221780812218368

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    You can’t do amnesty and prevent AZ, TX, GA, FL from going blue.

    People should stop using DACA as the label for this. It’s much bigger. It’s 5 million at least.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "People should stop using DACA as the label for this. It’s much bigger. It’s 5 million at least."

    Indeed. The rules to qualify for the "dreamer" amnesty will be vaguely written and broadly interpreted. Congressmen who vote for the bill will claim it only covers a certain number of illegals but those numerical limits will be nowhere in the actual bill. Pretty soon some guy who came here illegally at the age of 50 and took a few classes at the continuing education center will be certified as a dreamer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Surprise!

    Trump’s core political philosophy:

    INVADE THE WORLD, INVITE THE WORLD

    Read More
    • Agree: KM32
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Why should China/Norks respect Trump?

    Trump rolls over to his pathetically weak domestic opposition. Pelosi/Schumer were lost in the frigging wilderness!

    Trump wants to ramp the debt. Putting China in more control.

    MAGA is a complete charade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Trump’s tweets this morning sound like ¡Jeb!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    It’s Schwarzenegger all over again. But even more galling because Trump has mocked Arnold for being a political failure.

    Trump’s tweet history is a savage contradiction to everything he says today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. @Buck Turgidson
    DACA is "popular" .... Which means the lefties at 538 and their fellow sjw pinheads like it.

    DACA is popular...but Trump's "hardline" position won him the presidency. Yeah got it

    Geezus do these mental midgets ever think before they hit the send button. The mental gymnastic contortions these dumbasses go through blows their cranial circuitry.

    And dont they know they need to use the word "crackdown" in these hit pieces?

    They probably think DACA is popular because people will say “yes” to a pollster who asks “Should children be torn out of their parents’ arms and exiled?”

    The result would be different if DACA were represented more fairly, eg “Should the US welcome illegal immigrants who say they are under 35, and furthermore claim, without proof, that their parents brought them here when they were 16 or less?”

    Same with gun control. “Should unstable individuals have ready access to Browning Machine Guns placed on hills overlooking preschools” vs “Should any civilians, other than criminals, be allowed to own guns?”

    Read More
    • Agree: Luke Lea, AnotherDad
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    The result would be different if DACA were represented more fairly, eg “Should the US welcome illegal immigrants who say they are under 35, and furthermore claim, without proof, that their parents brought them here when they were 16 or less?”
     
    And even more different if the question contained a reminder that their legalized status would be a special preferred status superior to that of white citizens.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Stephen Miller is the man most responsible for convincing American nationalist conservatives to vote for Trump, not Cruz or Paul, in the primaries, and to vote for Trump, not Darrel Castle, in the general election.

    Lesson learned.

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner’s father-in-law.

    Read More
    • Disagree: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner’s father-in-law.
     
    Oh please!

    I stand behind no one in opposing Jewish minoritarianism. It has been an extremely successful ideology--pushed by Hollyweird, the media, academia--in undermining the West and creating this crisis of survival.

    But it's just stupid to bad mouth, alienate and push out Jews who are on the side of whites/the West. We want Jews to cut the hostile minoritarianism and act like normal white people ... and then when one does so you want to piss on him? Not just "unhelpful", but deeply stupid.

    Miller cut his teeth on this ugly leftist Duke Lacrosse "rape" fraud. He's been in the trenches on immigration sanity for Sessions--which included defeating the gang of 8 amnesty (saving America) and which also means the sensible immigration policy Trump borrowed from him. He's been speech writer behind of a lot of the best, most-sensible lines Trump has said. And Miller's about the only serious nationalist left in the White House.

    And you're going to link him with a typical Jewish bozo like Jared Kushner because they are both Jews?

    That Trump is flakey and unsteady is not Miller's fault. Even flakey Trump was still a damn sight better and tougher on civilizational survival than Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Miller has done more *himself* to save the West than Paul or Cruz ever done. And if there had been a great nationalist candidate better than Trump--Miller would have been there. His judgment looks pretty darn sound to me. Miller is the real deal. A guy who wants to save the nation.
    , @MarkinLA
    All you people still whining about Cruz and why you were so right about Trump have to get this one big fact through your thick heads:

    HILLARY WOULD HAVE WIPED THE FLOOR WITH CRUZ

    So what good would a Cruz nomination have been? Cruz was also for some accommodation of the Dreamers and other long time illegals - just not citizenship. He was a globalist like his wife and Hillary. Just how does Cruz get the electoral college votes for Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan?

    Do you really think Cruz would have "outdebated" Hillary and the American public would have magically changed their view of Cruz. Cruz was just as unlikable as Hillary but Cruz was a holy roller Republican in their eyes.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like....
     
    John Gruskos
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Read More
    • Replies: @Romanian
    There goes the neighborhood!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. RCB says:
    @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    Suppose I tell you that the probability of flipping a coin twice and getting heads both times is 25%.

    Suppose you then flip a coin twice, and you get heads both times.

    Was I wrong?

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Please don't. You know what happened. The prognostications of the Nate Silvers of the world are based upon polls. They come up with percentages, but their job is not so much to crunch odds as to tell you which polls to trust. What happens if the answer is none of them? Then Nate Silver might as well be an author of fan-fiction.

    Nate Silver made his reputation by picking the right polls in 2012. In 2016, he couldn't tell the polls were bunkum. In that case, what good is he? Aside from writing snarky posts that make hipsters feel good, that's his entire job.

    Oh, but he admitted it wasn't impossible for Trump to win, so people like you can pretend he was right either way.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. I’m going to help Trump:

    Read More
    • LOL: RonaldB
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. Trump’s Hardline Immigration Stance Got Him To The White House

    IMMIGRATION ISSUE PUTS TRUMP IN WHITE HOUSE

    President Trump must remember that to be loved, it helps to be somewhat lovable. Trumpy has made himself highly unlovable with his wobbly, weasel-like contortionist stance on IMMIGRATION!

    Candidate Trump won the Republican Party nomination for president and the presidency itself by sticking to a restrictionist stance on immigration. President Trump is now betraying his voters by trimming his sails on immigration. STOP THE IMMIGRATION TRIMMER HORSESHIT TRUMPY!

    Candidate Trump said he would reduce legal immigration and, if necessary, put a moratorium on the issuance of new green cards. Candidate Trump said he would deport illegal alien invaders. Candidate Trump said he would build a wall on the border between the United States and Mexico and make the Mexican government pay for the wall in combination with a surcharge on remittances to Mexico. Candidate Trump said he would make sure that United States immigration policy serves the interests of American citizens first, before any consideration of the demands of foreigners.

    President Trump is frigging pissing off a lot of his voters unnecessarily with this weak, cowardly hemming and hawing horseshit on IMMIGRATION!

    President Trump should listen to Ann Coulter, Steve Sailer, Stephen Miller, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Peter Brimelow and his GODDAMN VOTERS!

    President Trump should call for a moratorium on all legal immigration.

    President Trump should immediately DEPORT all illegal alien invaders and stop illegal immigration cold.

    President Trump should discontinue the refugee resettlement program immediately.

    We want to love President Trump, but when President Trump goes out of his way to make himself unlovable on immigration, then American patriots have to call attention to Trump’s betrayal on the question of nation-wrecking mass immigration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
    Another great post, Charles, agreed 100%. Immigration is my #1, 2, and 3 issue and I'm not sure what 4 is, maybe bring some sanity to these foreign incursions that we seem to be involved with everywhere.

    Trump sure seems to be changing his tune on immigration, now he's telling us that Dreamers are cuddly awesome contributors? Didn't he tell the families with loved ones killed by drunken and lawless 'dreamers' that he was for them, and going to deport these illegals? At least that's what I thought I was voting for.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. 11 Bravo says:

    I am hearing supporters of DACA repeat over and over that it is inhumane to take a child who has grown up in one country and send him to one in which he has never been, and whose language he does not speak.

    Does this mean that Julia Ioffe, Max Boot, Cathy Young, Masha Gessen, et al, were treated inhumanely when taken as children from the only nation they had ever known and sent to one where they didn’t even know the language?

    If that is the metric for inhumane behavior than shouldn’t we end all immigration of families with children today? Shouldn’t we end all refugee programs as well?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RonaldB
    Seems to me the DREAMers should be angry at their parents. Why should the US make up for the irresponsibility of these parents and take better care of the offspring than the parents did?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Bannon leaves the government to take control of Breitbart at the same time Trump appears to “cuck” on immigration.

    Here’s what I’m hoping is really going on:

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors. Breitbart would then have to, somehow, capture a lot more mindshare of the Republican base with which to hammer the treasonous incumbents into the ground where they are challenged by patriotic primary candidates. We have a formula for this in the origin of The Drudge Report: Apparently what happened to make Drudge so influential was being fed intelligence by some faction of the Southern California Jewish elite — perhaps the Mossad-connected Lansky-mob remnants that got Nixon and Reagan elected — with which Drudge was able to go after Clinton. Similar intelligence could be fed to Bannon to help exploit the credibility chasm that has opened up in mass media “news” — and power the Breitbart hammer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    How many "-d chess" are we up to now?
    , @Kevin C.

    permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty.
     
    Once again, I find myself perplexed how people can think this matters. Because once elected, these fresh faces who promise up and down they'll be different will quickly become just another bunch of John McCains and Lindsey Grahams. Because that's the only thing a Republican Congress-critter is allowed to be, it's the job, to put up a valiant show of opposing the Left, and then lose, all the time maintaining kayfabe, to prop up the illusion that Congress is anything other than a mostly powerless, vestigial appendage of the true government, one of "the last remnants of the Old Republic", to quote Wilhuff Tarkin.

    (I'm just waiting to see how long before Gorsuch becomes another John "PPACA is Schrödinger's Tax" Roberts, because it's just a matter of time; right-wing appointees to the Supreme Court moving leftward once on the bench is practically a law of nature.)

    Elections, primary or general, do not accomplish anything. Our unelected Lords and Masters shall rule as they will, and there is naught we peasants can do but suffer their whims.
    , @Dump Trump

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors...
     
    Still holding out for that 18D chess scenario I see. I'm afraid you've given the man too much credit. He's a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved. Now he's hated by all. The Dems will never love him, and his base hate him even more, save for a few die-hard fan boys/girls from the Appalachian.

    Give it up. You can tell from the way he talks the man is about an inch deep, with nothing but hot air and a bad comb-over between the ears. He is no thinker or strategic playmaker. He just got outplayed by a cunning Jew. He blusters, lies and then caves completely. He's as good as dead to me.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @International Jew
    They probably think DACA is popular because people will say "yes" to a pollster who asks "Should children be torn out of their parents' arms and exiled?"

    The result would be different if DACA were represented more fairly, eg "Should the US welcome illegal immigrants who say they are under 35, and furthermore claim, without proof, that their parents brought them here when they were 16 or less?"

    Same with gun control. "Should unstable individuals have ready access to Browning Machine Guns placed on hills overlooking preschools" vs "Should any civilians, other than criminals, be allowed to own guns?"

    The result would be different if DACA were represented more fairly, eg “Should the US welcome illegal immigrants who say they are under 35, and furthermore claim, without proof, that their parents brought them here when they were 16 or less?”

    And even more different if the question contained a reminder that their legalized status would be a special preferred status superior to that of white citizens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. This Tweet from 2015 shows the importance of the immigration issue to candidate Trump in the Southern GOP primary states. Jeff Sessions’s endorsement of candidate Trump helped Trump win a big bunch of Southern states. At the time, Jeff Sessions was widely known for his pro-worker, pro-sovereignty immigration restrictionist stance.

    This Tweet from 2015 shows that Trump was smart to run against both the Democrats and the GOP ruling class. Trump showed his allegiance to the voters by taking a restrictionist stance on legal immigration and promising to deport illegal alien invaders.

    President Trump must once again promise to deport ALL illegal alien infiltrators and put into place a complete and total immigration moratorium.

    President Trump is now kicking his own voters in the gut on the immigration question, and they are angry as all hell, as well they should be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    Jeff Sessions’s endorsement of candidate Trump helped Trump win a big bunch of Southern states. At the time, Jeff Sessions was widely known for his pro-worker, pro-sovereignty immigration restrictionist stance.
     
    Speaking of which, has Jeff Sessions weighed in on Trump's dealmaking with "Chuck and Nancy?" Is he willing to remain part of an administration that gives away this biggest amnesty of the century in exchange for nothing?
    , @RonaldB
    In my opinion, Sessions stabbed Trump in the back by recusing himself from the Russian investigation, and allowing an unscrupulous anti-Trumper with complete connections to the Deep State to carry out an unlimited investigation of Trump and all Trump's associates. Sessions was being self-indulgent when he shirked his responsibility to make sure an equitable legal process was followed.

    Anyway, Trump now has a tenacious, unprincipled prosecutor harassing not only him, but all his family and associates. Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.

    With this sort of threat, it's no wonder that Trump is off his game. I don't say this to make excuses for his turning his back on his most fundamental campaign issues, but it's difficult to see Sessions petulant action as not being a turning point in following Trump's original agenda.
    , @Kevin C.

    President Trump must once again promise to deport ALL illegal alien infiltrators and put into place a complete and total immigration moratorium.
     
    He can promise it all he wants, but he'll never be able to. Because he doesn't have the power to do so, because the Deep State, not the president, is really in charge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. (1) If the illegal immigrants are so great, then the progressive policy is to send them back to Mexico. Mexico needs valuable citizens more than we do.

    (2) If it’s cruel to send them back, then the solution is to work with the Mexican government to make sure they get the support they need to reintegrate back into Mexican society.

    That no one makes these arguments tells you that ulterior motives are (obviously) involved. Operating in good faith on this issue is akin to wearing a kick me sign.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. eah says:

    People are really hammering Trump for his perfidy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. MBlanc46 says:
    @BEER/ we're all going to die
    Yes we know, Trump can be a hero. The people presented Trump a golden opportunity for historic glory. Or a one term POTUS, hated by his former supporters in addition to all those that would hate him even if he cured cancer, which is a hell of a lot of people. It's clear enough what must be done and amnesty is off the damn table. Next up, birthright citizenship, H1B visas, and limiting immigration to attractive white women from Europe that need protection from monsters like Angela Merkel and Merkel's Moslem men.

    We inow what must be done, but it doesn’t look as if Donald Trump knows. He acts as if he hasn’t a clue about why people voted for him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RonaldB
    He is acting out of the instincts of the used-car salesman, who does his best to sell insubstantial glossies in exchange for hard cash, and wins big if he succeeds.
    , @Realist
    Trump is a one termer dumb ass. But it doesn't matter, who ever is elected the out come will be the same.
    The Deep State will not be denied.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Thomas says:
    @James Bowery
    Bannon leaves the government to take control of Breitbart at the same time Trump appears to "cuck" on immigration.

    Here's what I'm hoping is really going on:

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump's "cucking" may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors. Breitbart would then have to, somehow, capture a lot more mindshare of the Republican base with which to hammer the treasonous incumbents into the ground where they are challenged by patriotic primary candidates. We have a formula for this in the origin of The Drudge Report: Apparently what happened to make Drudge so influential was being fed intelligence by some faction of the Southern California Jewish elite -- perhaps the Mossad-connected Lansky-mob remnants that got Nixon and Reagan elected -- with which Drudge was able to go after Clinton. Similar intelligence could be fed to Bannon to help exploit the credibility chasm that has opened up in mass media "news" -- and power the Breitbart hammer.

    How many “-d chess” are we up to now?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Thomas says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    This Tweet from 2015 shows the importance of the immigration issue to candidate Trump in the Southern GOP primary states. Jeff Sessions's endorsement of candidate Trump helped Trump win a big bunch of Southern states. At the time, Jeff Sessions was widely known for his pro-worker, pro-sovereignty immigration restrictionist stance.

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/661251368942968833

    This Tweet from 2015 shows that Trump was smart to run against both the Democrats and the GOP ruling class. Trump showed his allegiance to the voters by taking a restrictionist stance on legal immigration and promising to deport illegal alien invaders.

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/660190399747768320

    President Trump must once again promise to deport ALL illegal alien infiltrators and put into place a complete and total immigration moratorium.

    President Trump is now kicking his own voters in the gut on the immigration question, and they are angry as all hell, as well they should be.

    Jeff Sessions’s endorsement of candidate Trump helped Trump win a big bunch of Southern states. At the time, Jeff Sessions was widely known for his pro-worker, pro-sovereignty immigration restrictionist stance.

    Speaking of which, has Jeff Sessions weighed in on Trump’s dealmaking with “Chuck and Nancy?” Is he willing to remain part of an administration that gives away this biggest amnesty of the century in exchange for nothing?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. If Trump folds on DACA look for the true believers to suggest some exotic chess or some seductive strategery or anything at all to comfort their own selves they did not vote for a liar

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    No, we will just rationalize with Trump or Hillary, Hillary or Trump, hmm, who is the better choice regardless??? Quienes mas macho?, Montalban o Lamas?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. RonaldB says:
    @11 Bravo
    I am hearing supporters of DACA repeat over and over that it is inhumane to take a child who has grown up in one country and send him to one in which he has never been, and whose language he does not speak.

    Does this mean that Julia Ioffe, Max Boot, Cathy Young, Masha Gessen, et al, were treated inhumanely when taken as children from the only nation they had ever known and sent to one where they didn't even know the language?

    If that is the metric for inhumane behavior than shouldn't we end all immigration of families with children today? Shouldn't we end all refugee programs as well?

    Seems to me the DREAMers should be angry at their parents. Why should the US make up for the irresponsibility of these parents and take better care of the offspring than the parents did?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    In Jan Trump caved to AU Turnbull on a sick, weak deal where we got stuck with thousands of immigrant scum that AU refused to take themselves.

    Kim Jong Un saw that and put the pedal to the metal. Kim will not stop he knows Trump is a paper tiger.

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/09/14/north-koreas-nuclear-and-missile-program-moving-faster-than-expected-expert-says.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. RonaldB says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    This Tweet from 2015 shows the importance of the immigration issue to candidate Trump in the Southern GOP primary states. Jeff Sessions's endorsement of candidate Trump helped Trump win a big bunch of Southern states. At the time, Jeff Sessions was widely known for his pro-worker, pro-sovereignty immigration restrictionist stance.

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/661251368942968833

    This Tweet from 2015 shows that Trump was smart to run against both the Democrats and the GOP ruling class. Trump showed his allegiance to the voters by taking a restrictionist stance on legal immigration and promising to deport illegal alien invaders.

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/660190399747768320

    President Trump must once again promise to deport ALL illegal alien infiltrators and put into place a complete and total immigration moratorium.

    President Trump is now kicking his own voters in the gut on the immigration question, and they are angry as all hell, as well they should be.

    In my opinion, Sessions stabbed Trump in the back by recusing himself from the Russian investigation, and allowing an unscrupulous anti-Trumper with complete connections to the Deep State to carry out an unlimited investigation of Trump and all Trump’s associates. Sessions was being self-indulgent when he shirked his responsibility to make sure an equitable legal process was followed.

    Anyway, Trump now has a tenacious, unprincipled prosecutor harassing not only him, but all his family and associates. Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.

    With this sort of threat, it’s no wonder that Trump is off his game. I don’t say this to make excuses for his turning his back on his most fundamental campaign issues, but it’s difficult to see Sessions petulant action as not being a turning point in following Trump’s original agenda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Gruskos
    Sessions didn't stab anyone in the back. He simply followed the law.

    He is the only cabinet member in this or any other administration in my lifetime who supports enforcing the immigration laws and avoiding unnecessary wars.
    , @Charles Pewitt
    Mueller ain't going to do nothing but enjoy some government-paid travel and chow. Mueller has already signalled that he is going to broaden out his focus to just about everything involving Russians, including the alleged use of social media by Russia to "interfere" in elections in the United States. That leads me to believe that Mueller will keep this nonsense open for a while and then submit some kind of vague report about this or that. Mueller is going to go fishing for a time and then say the Russians ain't no good -- Mueller does not want to start a civil war by mucking around in a manner that will piss off President Trump's 60 million voters.

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a great man and one of the best things about the Trump administration.
    , @EdwardM

    Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.
     
    A third possibility: Sessions is an honorable, humble man who can only do what he knows to be right. He stated quite clearly during a Senate hearing that he felt he had to recuse himself from the investigation of Russian interference in the campaign because, according to black-letter DOJ rules, he can't oversee an investigation of a campaign that he was part of.

    You could fairly say that this makes Sessions naive, not fit for such an important job in such a toxic anti-Trump environment, and/or that he should have foreseen this chain of events and not accepted the job as AG. But I wouldn't criticize him for anything beyond his lack of sufficient cynicism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. RonaldB says:
    @MBlanc46
    We inow what must be done, but it doesn't look as if Donald Trump knows. He acts as if he hasn't a clue about why people voted for him.

    He is acting out of the instincts of the used-car salesman, who does his best to sell insubstantial glossies in exchange for hard cash, and wins big if he succeeds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Kevin C. says:
    @BEER/ we're all going to die
    Yes we know, Trump can be a hero. The people presented Trump a golden opportunity for historic glory. Or a one term POTUS, hated by his former supporters in addition to all those that would hate him even if he cured cancer, which is a hell of a lot of people. It's clear enough what must be done and amnesty is off the damn table. Next up, birthright citizenship, H1B visas, and limiting immigration to attractive white women from Europe that need protection from monsters like Angela Merkel and Merkel's Moslem men.

    birthright citizenship

    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that’s especially difficult to accomplish. But then, it’s not like it’s really possible to get any of the other things on your list. And it’s not just Trump; any other person in his position would prove equally powerless. Because the “Deep State” rules, and no mere president, or Congress, has the power to stop them, the absolute Lords of America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that’s especially difficult to accomplish."

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it. Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court. Our laws are ignored all the time. Our Constitution is ignored all the time.
    , @JerseyJeffersonian
    While @Wilkey may be correct, if you cut off the flow of illegals entering the country, the chances of large numbers of birthright citizens being born goes way, way down. Finding a way to stop Chinese women from landing here, and then squirreling themselves away in a hotel until the "blessed event" happens would be a component of that as well.
    , @bartok

    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of
     
    No way. The State Dept. and SSA simply must explain to the states that "under the jurisdiction of" must be proven before SS cards and passports are issued. Illegal aliens are not "under the jurisdiction of" the US government.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Kevin C. says:
    @James Bowery
    Bannon leaves the government to take control of Breitbart at the same time Trump appears to "cuck" on immigration.

    Here's what I'm hoping is really going on:

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump's "cucking" may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors. Breitbart would then have to, somehow, capture a lot more mindshare of the Republican base with which to hammer the treasonous incumbents into the ground where they are challenged by patriotic primary candidates. We have a formula for this in the origin of The Drudge Report: Apparently what happened to make Drudge so influential was being fed intelligence by some faction of the Southern California Jewish elite -- perhaps the Mossad-connected Lansky-mob remnants that got Nixon and Reagan elected -- with which Drudge was able to go after Clinton. Similar intelligence could be fed to Bannon to help exploit the credibility chasm that has opened up in mass media "news" -- and power the Breitbart hammer.

    permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty.

    Once again, I find myself perplexed how people can think this matters. Because once elected, these fresh faces who promise up and down they’ll be different will quickly become just another bunch of John McCains and Lindsey Grahams. Because that’s the only thing a Republican Congress-critter is allowed to be, it’s the job, to put up a valiant show of opposing the Left, and then lose, all the time maintaining kayfabe, to prop up the illusion that Congress is anything other than a mostly powerless, vestigial appendage of the true government, one of “the last remnants of the Old Republic”, to quote Wilhuff Tarkin.

    (I’m just waiting to see how long before Gorsuch becomes another John “PPACA is Schrödinger’s Tax” Roberts, because it’s just a matter of time; right-wing appointees to the Supreme Court moving leftward once on the bench is practically a law of nature.)

    Elections, primary or general, do not accomplish anything. Our unelected Lords and Masters shall rule as they will, and there is naught we peasants can do but suffer their whims.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Bowery
    My choice of word "hope" reflects an appropriate sense of powerlessness in the face of Jewish domination. That hope is based on a similar insight that led me to, in 1998 state:

    "Check out the ethnicity of the folks at Clinton’s “town meeting” trying to trump up support for a war in the middle east on behalf of Israel—putting the US in a lonely international position and making people like you and I a target for terrorism or a Jewish-inspired Reichstag."

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/project_megiddo_or_why_james_bowery_should_run_the_fbi/

    That was only one, of a number, of such statements I made during the 1990's anticipating 9/11/2001 and the consequent disastrous military actions in the middle east.

    When that disaster came to pass, it took me a while to come to the conclusion that a rift between neocons and Likuds had opened up due to the damage done by "invade the world invite the world" -- but when Trump made his "Mexican Rapist" speech, I immediately declared him "The Likud Candidate" and gave him a significant chance of winning it all.

    It boils down to this:

    Zionism has one great virtue: It puts Jews in a position where they learn what it takes to _sustainably_ run a nation. Up until the insanity of the Bush thence Obama years, the serious nationalists in Israel hadn't really learned that the US was 1) Theirs to lose and 2) Being lost due to diaspora Jewish behavior -- including neocon as well as Frankfurt School Cultural Marxist excesses.

    I believe they have learned at least to a significant degree -- although it may be too little, too late now.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. anon456 says:

    “Immigration” includes several issues. Namely two. Are you OK with more Mexicans? What about Muslims?

    America likes Mexicans but detests Muslim refugees. I doubt opposing Mexican immigration is what got Trump elected. But wanting to stop Muslim refugee admissions sure did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "America likes Mexicans"

    America likes Mexican food. That's about as far as it goes. We don't really need Mexicans for that.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I doubt opposing Mexican immigration is what got Trump elected.
     
    Wrong. Trump’s candidacy announcement on June 16, 2015 is what made his
    presidency possible:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_q61B-DyPk&feature=youtu.be&t=7m58s

    His lines on Mexican and other Latin American invaders was the big news that week, resulting in gasps of horror and derision from the MSM. Millions of MAGA voters were suddenly minted that week, but the pollsters and RINOs and most of the left either didn’t (or didn’t want to) recognize it.

    Three days later on Bill Maher’s show, Ann Coulter matter-of-factly called it correctly:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-2uSG1xUEg

    Regarding the announcement video I linked to: It’s from Trump’s official YouTube campaign channel “Donald J. Trump for President.” It racked up 2,778,000 views and is now “unlisted” by the channel admin, the only searchable videos being stuff from after the inauguration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Kevin C. says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    This Tweet from 2015 shows the importance of the immigration issue to candidate Trump in the Southern GOP primary states. Jeff Sessions's endorsement of candidate Trump helped Trump win a big bunch of Southern states. At the time, Jeff Sessions was widely known for his pro-worker, pro-sovereignty immigration restrictionist stance.

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/661251368942968833

    This Tweet from 2015 shows that Trump was smart to run against both the Democrats and the GOP ruling class. Trump showed his allegiance to the voters by taking a restrictionist stance on legal immigration and promising to deport illegal alien invaders.

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/660190399747768320

    President Trump must once again promise to deport ALL illegal alien infiltrators and put into place a complete and total immigration moratorium.

    President Trump is now kicking his own voters in the gut on the immigration question, and they are angry as all hell, as well they should be.

    President Trump must once again promise to deport ALL illegal alien infiltrators and put into place a complete and total immigration moratorium.

    He can promise it all he wants, but he’ll never be able to. Because he doesn’t have the power to do so, because the Deep State, not the president, is really in charge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be rocking on the balls of his feet with his fists clenched tightly together as he slowly explains to President Trump why any form of legalization, or recognition of legal status for illegal alien infiltrators is amnesty. Jeff Sessions will tell President Trump that recognizing Obama’s unlawful actions in regards to his executive amnesty for illegal aliens will be harmful to the rule of law in the United States.

    Hopefully, Jeff Sessions will start off telling President Trump that it is fine to have a heart and feel some sympathy for the illegal aliens but the rule of law is too important to be discarded just to satisfy some temporary feelings of compassion for the illegal aliens. Sessions must tell President Trump that the interests of current citizens must take precedence over the interests of illegal alien invaders. Sessions must tell President Trump that giving amnesty to the illegal aliens will set a horrible precedent that will come back to haunt the United States in the same manner that Reagan’s disastrous amnesty of 1986 has caused so much trouble for the United States.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Like that article about Trump bombing Syria after having been shown that there was no conclusive proof Syria was involved, Trump CANNOT ever admit he made a mistake. He has been braying about all these super-geniuses and their stellar achievements (graduating from America's worst performing high schools). I doubt there is anyway he can allow himself to see reality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. guest says:
    @Declane
    Hillary allowed Trump to beat 16 other Republicans? Really?

    People seem so confused about why Trump won. It's the economy. Immigration is a huge part of that. We're already strengthening our trade deals. Next we build a wall.

    It's going to happen and it's going to be glorious. We've got a couple of decades of growth ahead of us until the globalists force another civil war. Enjoy it while it lasts.

    “Hillary allowed Trump to beat out 16 other Republicans? Really?”

    I’m not sure you know how presidential elections work. Trump could’ve bested 16 billion Republicans. If he doesn’t beat out his general election opponent(s), he doesn’t get to the White House.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    I’m not sure you know how presidential elections work. Trump could’ve bested 16 billion Republicans. If he doesn’t beat out his general election opponent(s), he doesn’t get to the White House.
     
    Perhaps you didn't read through the snippet provided and see the claim 538 is actually making.
    It is titled:

    "Trump's hardline immigration stance got him to the White House"
     
    "got him to the White House" not "beat Hillary".

    Getting to the White House is a process, which for Trump included getting media attention and winning the Republican nomination. Their wrap paragraph makes this clear:

    In 2016, moreover, immigration may have been the issue most responsible for Trump’s winning the Republican nomination. In every state with a caucus or primary exit poll, he did best among voters who said immigration was their top issue.
     
    I don't disagree with you that the #1 reason Trump beat Hillary is ... "Hillary". Joe Biden would probably have beaten Trump. Probably a good number of other bland Democrats without such high negatives. But immigration is clearly the #1 issue for why this guy named Trump is there instead of someone else.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. guest says:
    @Ed
    Immigration is got him the primary win though, that's the point.

    “Immigration got him the primary win though, that’s the point”

    Then why did the headline say it’s what got Trump to the White House instead of to the nomination?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    All those who are angry with Trump should diagnose the power that pressured him to change his mind.

    People got him into the highest office, but it is dominated by the old players.

    It’s like parents can work and slave to send their kid to good college… but the kid is gonna come under domination of prog professors.

    Trump was sent to top school by the people but he got schooled by the tenured professors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    People got him into the highest office, but it is dominated by the old players.

    It’s like parents can work and slave to send their kid to good college… but the kid is gonna come under domination of prog professors.

    Trump was sent to top school by the people but he got schooled by the tenured professors.
     
    Exactly. It's the unelected "old players", not any merely-elected president, who are really in charge. And what they say goes, no matter how much "we the people" oppose it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. guest says:
    @RCB
    Suppose I tell you that the probability of flipping a coin twice and getting heads both times is 25%.

    Suppose you then flip a coin twice, and you get heads both times.

    Was I wrong?

    Please don’t. You know what happened. The prognostications of the Nate Silvers of the world are based upon polls. They come up with percentages, but their job is not so much to crunch odds as to tell you which polls to trust. What happens if the answer is none of them? Then Nate Silver might as well be an author of fan-fiction.

    Nate Silver made his reputation by picking the right polls in 2012. In 2016, he couldn’t tell the polls were bunkum. In that case, what good is he? Aside from writing snarky posts that make hipsters feel good, that’s his entire job.

    Oh, but he admitted it wasn’t impossible for Trump to win, so people like you can pretend he was right either way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @RonaldB
    In my opinion, Sessions stabbed Trump in the back by recusing himself from the Russian investigation, and allowing an unscrupulous anti-Trumper with complete connections to the Deep State to carry out an unlimited investigation of Trump and all Trump's associates. Sessions was being self-indulgent when he shirked his responsibility to make sure an equitable legal process was followed.

    Anyway, Trump now has a tenacious, unprincipled prosecutor harassing not only him, but all his family and associates. Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.

    With this sort of threat, it's no wonder that Trump is off his game. I don't say this to make excuses for his turning his back on his most fundamental campaign issues, but it's difficult to see Sessions petulant action as not being a turning point in following Trump's original agenda.

    Sessions didn’t stab anyone in the back. He simply followed the law.

    He is the only cabinet member in this or any other administration in my lifetime who supports enforcing the immigration laws and avoiding unnecessary wars.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @RonaldB
    In my opinion, Sessions stabbed Trump in the back by recusing himself from the Russian investigation, and allowing an unscrupulous anti-Trumper with complete connections to the Deep State to carry out an unlimited investigation of Trump and all Trump's associates. Sessions was being self-indulgent when he shirked his responsibility to make sure an equitable legal process was followed.

    Anyway, Trump now has a tenacious, unprincipled prosecutor harassing not only him, but all his family and associates. Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.

    With this sort of threat, it's no wonder that Trump is off his game. I don't say this to make excuses for his turning his back on his most fundamental campaign issues, but it's difficult to see Sessions petulant action as not being a turning point in following Trump's original agenda.

    Mueller ain’t going to do nothing but enjoy some government-paid travel and chow. Mueller has already signalled that he is going to broaden out his focus to just about everything involving Russians, including the alleged use of social media by Russia to “interfere” in elections in the United States. That leads me to believe that Mueller will keep this nonsense open for a while and then submit some kind of vague report about this or that. Mueller is going to go fishing for a time and then say the Russians ain’t no good — Mueller does not want to start a civil war by mucking around in a manner that will piss off President Trump’s 60 million voters.

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a great man and one of the best things about the Trump administration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    Sorry, but you're just reading things totally backward on Mueller.

    "Mueller has already signalled that he is going to broaden out his focus to just about everything involving Russians, including the alleged use of social media by Russia to “interfere” in elections in the United States."

    Which means he's going to keep up casting a wider and wider net until he can find enough "dirt" that our Mass Media can cobble together into a supposed "smoking gun", to thereby give cover to the cuckservatives and NeverTrumpers among the Congressional GOP to "reluctantly and with great sadness" join the Democrats in impeaching and removing Trump (and thereby establishing GOPe control of the party).

    mucking around in a manner that will piss off President Trump’s 60 million voters.
     
    So what if "Trump’s 60 million voters" (note, I am part of this group) get "pissed off"? What can we do, but stew impotently in our anger and frustration? Because there's nothing we can do about it. Are you familiar with the "Bonus Army", and what happened to them?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Anonymous
    Someone remind 2017 Trump of this

    No doubt the usual suspects will be by to talk about how this is 88 dimensional chess or something

    “88 dimensional chess” No, just 4D, but appreciate the double 8′s

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. guest says:
    @anon456
    "Immigration" includes several issues. Namely two. Are you OK with more Mexicans? What about Muslims?

    America likes Mexicans but detests Muslim refugees. I doubt opposing Mexican immigration is what got Trump elected. But wanting to stop Muslim refugee admissions sure did.

    “America likes Mexicans”

    America likes Mexican food. That’s about as far as it goes. We don’t really need Mexicans for that.

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @3g4me
    @59 Guest: "America likes Mexican food."

    I despise Mexican food. Give me Moroccan, Lebanese, Turkish, Hungarian, and I'm happy and fat. Not the people, please note (except for the Hungarians - saw some amazing looking people while in Budapest) - just the food. You can keep Mexican Mestizos and tacos and beans and even tequila - America will be better of without them all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque
    If Trump folds on DACA look for the true believers to suggest some exotic chess or some seductive strategery or anything at all to comfort their own selves they did not vote for a liar

    No, we will just rationalize with Trump or Hillary, Hillary or Trump, hmm, who is the better choice regardless??? Quienes mas macho?, Montalban o Lamas?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    I think it was an iSteve commenter who put it this way a few months back: “It’s as if your weatherman said there was a 30% chance of rain today … and it rains.”

    I used this analogy recently with an acquaintance who was upset at Silver’s giving Trump 28% odds when he obviously should have had 100% odds, and he sneered: “So let me get this straight: You’re saying Nate Silver is about as reliable as a weatherman?”

    “Well, yeah. They’re not fortune tellers.” We moved on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    For some reason people are stuck on the odds part. Look, it wouldn't matter to me if Silver guessed wrong, because predicting elections isn't easy. But it's obvious that he gave Trump such bad odds because he trusted the polls. He couldn't tell the polls were wrong, and analyzing polls is really his only job. So what good is he? Why are we listening to him?

    Weathermen presumably have meteorological training and can guess better than the man on the street, even if they don't guess well. With the last election, if you gave the man in the street no information but that it was Candidate X versus Candidate Y, if he was smart he'd just give each 50/50 odds. That's better than Nate Silver's prediction. So why did he waste all that time thinking and number-crunching?

    Weather prognostication at least has some basis in science. Nate Silvering comes down to belief in Magic Polls.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Wilkey says:

    “Additionally, immigration tends to be an issue that is more important to Republicans than Democrats.”

    Intensity matters more than polling numbers. We’ve seen this on both sides. Most Americans were against gay marriage, but gays felt far more passionately about it, despite the fact that most of them will never, ever marry.

    The same goes with immigration, but in a way that mostly favors Republicans. Most people, even many well educated people, are oblivious to the immigration issue. They have no idea of how mass immigration, especially illegal immigration, is affecting our country. Those people who are aware mostly favor enforcement. The major exception to that, of course, is illegals and their relatives.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Regarding gay marriage, that was more often than not a legal issue. Gays didn't have to be too passionate to convince judges as compared to regular folks.

    They did an amazing job propaganda-wise over the last several decades. But there's was not a political victory in the usual sense. Even when it was instituted by elected officials, that doesn't necessarily mean it was with the consent of the electorate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Wilkey says:
    @Kevin C.

    birthright citizenship
     
    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that's especially difficult to accomplish. But then, it's not like it's really possible to get any of the other things on your list. And it's not just Trump; any other person in his position would prove equally powerless. Because the "Deep State" rules, and no mere president, or Congress, has the power to stop them, the absolute Lords of America.

    “This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that’s especially difficult to accomplish.”

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it. Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court. Our laws are ignored all the time. Our Constitution is ignored all the time.

    Read More
    • Agree: 27 year old, Maj. Kong
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it.
     
    Sure, but that will never happen, because right-wing SCOTUS appointees, no matter how far right, move inevitably to the left, while left-wing SCOTUS appointees… stay the same or move further left. Plus, right-wing judges are rightly disdainful of the sort of sophistry (of which leftist judges are experts) that would be necessary to somehow read birthright citizenship out of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship clause: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

    A right-wing SCOTUS is a pipe dream, let alone one that would engage in the sort of judicial activism necessary to do this.

    Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court.
     
    Perhaps leftist politicians could get away with doing this, but let a righty try and the screams of "separation of powers" and "far-right jackboots" will be deafening until the offender is removed, perhaps even jailed (remember, the US Marshalls are part of the Judicial branch, and part of their job is enforcing Federal court orders).

    Our laws are ignored all the time.
     
    By leftists, who are the ones who get to decide which laws-on-paper actually count and which don't; who decide which masked men are in violation of the anti-Klan laws and which are free to hide their faces as they set about their mob action; who the cops are to arrest for the "hate crime" of defending themselves from "youths" who "dindu nuffin'", and who the cops are to give "space to destroy".

    Our Constitution is ignored all the time.
     
    Again, by leftists, who are the ones who rule. As the Romans said, quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi; what is permissible to Jove is not permissible to an ox. The Rulers have always been able to violate the same laws they enforce upon the Ruled. They can get away with doing such things, but we cannot, and will be punished most severely if we try.

    The war between the American Left and Right is not being waged now, but in fact, it is already over: the Left won. Completely. We are a defeated tribe, as much as any Reservation Indian. Hence the rise of white opiate deaths. Like Indians on the rez slowly drinking themselves to death, these are the actions of a defeated people who know the future belongs to the enemy.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Agreed on all that, Wilkey, but also it is NOT clear-cut that Amendment IV allows for citizenship from anyone born in the US. There is a clause requiring the parents to be under jurisdiction of one of the states, or the Feral Gov't. I am no constitutional lawyer, but Ann Coulter IS a lawyer, and she wrote about this - on VDare as well as wherever else her column appears. Here is something from VDare, but I swear she wrote another that I couldn't follow completely on the lawyerly talk about precedents, etc. I can't find that other one, if it exists at all.

    Ann Coulter could be a "friend of the court".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Richard Spencer has effectively destroyed the Trump
    agenda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    McAuliffe appears to have intended for violence to happen in Charlottesville, and the FBI was almost certainly among both sides. (We came very close to a shooting war)

    The Charlottesville riot led to the coup which we are now seeing the final stages of. The mass resignations by the CEOs was a demand (successful) to remove Bannon and Gorka, and let the neocons back in charge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Wilkey says:
    @Anonymous
    You can't do amnesty and prevent AZ, TX, GA, FL from going blue.

    People should stop using DACA as the label for this. It's much bigger. It's 5 million at least.

    “People should stop using DACA as the label for this. It’s much bigger. It’s 5 million at least.”

    Indeed. The rules to qualify for the “dreamer” amnesty will be vaguely written and broadly interpreted. Congressmen who vote for the bill will claim it only covers a certain number of illegals but those numerical limits will be nowhere in the actual bill. Pretty soon some guy who came here illegally at the age of 50 and took a few classes at the continuing education center will be certified as a dreamer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. guest says:
    @Wilkey
    "Additionally, immigration tends to be an issue that is more important to Republicans than Democrats."

    Intensity matters more than polling numbers. We've seen this on both sides. Most Americans were against gay marriage, but gays felt far more passionately about it, despite the fact that most of them will never, ever marry.

    The same goes with immigration, but in a way that mostly favors Republicans. Most people, even many well educated people, are oblivious to the immigration issue. They have no idea of how mass immigration, especially illegal immigration, is affecting our country. Those people who are aware mostly favor enforcement. The major exception to that, of course, is illegals and their relatives.

    Regarding gay marriage, that was more often than not a legal issue. Gays didn’t have to be too passionate to convince judges as compared to regular folks.

    They did an amazing job propaganda-wise over the last several decades. But there’s was not a political victory in the usual sense. Even when it was instituted by elected officials, that doesn’t necessarily mean it was with the consent of the electorate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Regarding gay marriage, that was more often than not a legal issue. Gays didn’t have to be too passionate to convince judges as compared to regular folks.
     
    Not really.

    I was early in my legal career but even I can recall that Constitutional arguments for Homosexual Marriage were laughed at out of hand by even liberal law professors. Like, "novel, but not compelling."

    Specifically, I can recall watching oral argument before the New York Court of Appeals (New York's highest court) rejecting those arguments as well as arguments under the New York Constitution.

    They just turned the propaganda up to 11.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Achmed E. Newman

    And dont they know they need to use the word “crackdown” in these hit pieces?
     
    Crackdown, strongman, and living in a compound. Those are the big ones from the cntrl-left style book.

    “controversial”
    “maverick”
    “extreme”
    on and on

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Achmed E. Newman
    Possibly the headline was there to get readers, who think "That's right, let me read the details", and then you get to the complete BS of his his "details".

    Speaking of the details, I've not been following it all, and I had thought the ending of DACA was a done deal. Man, I know this is MUCH better than the alternative (as written about yesterday), but this guy just doesn't give me any confidence that he meant anything he said, or he meant it, but has zero concentration and ability to keep his word.

    I don't want freakin' Art of the Deal on and on. Just do the things that you have the power to do!

    No “deals” Mr Trump! Every time there is a “deal” on Capitol Hill, the American people get rolled. It’s always schumer et al getting their stuff right now, then the other parts of the “agreement” things that maybe they will get around too later.

    1986 Amnesty Deal: “We’ll implement this amnesty but they you have Congress’ promise that there never will be another amnesty.”

    Remember that “deal”? Neither does schumer.

    Tired of getting rolled by congressional deals, just enforce the immigration laws, build the wall, enact a moratorium. I thought Trump was going to put America first, not illegal aliens who have been ripping us off for decades.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Charles Pewitt

    Trump’s Hardline Immigration Stance Got Him To The White House

     

    IMMIGRATION ISSUE PUTS TRUMP IN WHITE HOUSE

    President Trump must remember that to be loved, it helps to be somewhat lovable. Trumpy has made himself highly unlovable with his wobbly, weasel-like contortionist stance on IMMIGRATION!

    Candidate Trump won the Republican Party nomination for president and the presidency itself by sticking to a restrictionist stance on immigration. President Trump is now betraying his voters by trimming his sails on immigration. STOP THE IMMIGRATION TRIMMER HORSESHIT TRUMPY!

    Candidate Trump said he would reduce legal immigration and, if necessary, put a moratorium on the issuance of new green cards. Candidate Trump said he would deport illegal alien invaders. Candidate Trump said he would build a wall on the border between the United States and Mexico and make the Mexican government pay for the wall in combination with a surcharge on remittances to Mexico. Candidate Trump said he would make sure that United States immigration policy serves the interests of American citizens first, before any consideration of the demands of foreigners.

    President Trump is frigging pissing off a lot of his voters unnecessarily with this weak, cowardly hemming and hawing horseshit on IMMIGRATION!

    President Trump should listen to Ann Coulter, Steve Sailer, Stephen Miller, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Peter Brimelow and his GODDAMN VOTERS!

    President Trump should call for a moratorium on all legal immigration.

    President Trump should immediately DEPORT all illegal alien invaders and stop illegal immigration cold.

    President Trump should discontinue the refugee resettlement program immediately.

    We want to love President Trump, but when President Trump goes out of his way to make himself unlovable on immigration, then American patriots have to call attention to Trump's betrayal on the question of nation-wrecking mass immigration.

    Another great post, Charles, agreed 100%. Immigration is my #1, 2, and 3 issue and I’m not sure what 4 is, maybe bring some sanity to these foreign incursions that we seem to be involved with everywhere.

    Trump sure seems to be changing his tune on immigration, now he’s telling us that Dreamers are cuddly awesome contributors? Didn’t he tell the families with loved ones killed by drunken and lawless ‘dreamers’ that he was for them, and going to deport these illegals? At least that’s what I thought I was voting for.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Ed
    Immigration is one of those issues that can trip you up as a Republican. The media loves it and it appears to poll well but once something is suggested the backlash begins. Folks were already posting numbers to call their congressmen after this supposed deal leaked.

    It's very difficult to win GOP primaries being for amnesty. Flake is plummeting in the polls to the point some are openly wondering if he should even bother running or just declare he's an independent.

    The elite cannot accept that a majority of people are not supportive of mass immigration. Much less illegal immigration.

    They seem to be in some kind of denial.

    But nothing has changed with time or even the country. Throughout the West, mass immigration was imposed on the population. Who then became more and more disenchanted as time went on.

    Why can’t they see the obvious?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    The elite cannot accept that a majority of people are not supportive of mass immigration. Much less illegal immigration.

    They seem to be in some kind of denial.
     
    It's not that they cannot accept it, it's that they don't care. (When have ruling elites ever cared what the filthy peasant masses think?)

    Throughout the West, mass immigration was imposed on the population. Who then became more and more disenchanted as time went on.
     
    That's how the world has always worked. Elites impose their will on the powerless population, and the peasants can only suffer their whims. As Thucydides said over 2,400 years ago in the Melian Dialogue, "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." They are strong, we are weak.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. gregor says:
    @Clark Westwood
    People "like" DACA because they've bought the line of BS that all "Dreamers" are well-adapted high-school or college students who were brought here as toddlers.

    I came across a particularly aggressive example of DACA boosterism recently in the Atlantic. The article is about DACA medical students.

    I reached Marina Di Bartolo, an internal-medicine doctor at the University of Pennsylvania, on her walk home from the clinic on Thursday. That day, she treated a patient with high blood pressure, another who needed cataract surgery, and someone with a herniated disc from bungee jumping gone wrong. “Not the most glamorous stuff,” she said.

    Di Bartolo’s parents brought her from Venezuela at age 7, then overstayed their tourist visas. Her mother works as a babysitter and housekeeper, and her father does odd jobs and construction.

    Very representative, I’m sure. But even in these examples cherry-picked for maximal sympathy, there are still several points that will make anyone but the most committed lib raise an eyebrow.

    Meanwhile, the United States faces a shortage of up to 104,900 physicians, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

    Di Bartolo won a full scholarship to the Yale School of Medicine, and to Princeton before that. But for students who rely on financial aid, the end of DACA would mean they can no longer afford school for a simple reason: Few banks are eager to lend to students legally prohibited from working after graduation.

    “I won’t be able to pay my living expenses, much less my tuition” without loans, said Cesar Montolongo, a professorial MD-Ph.D. student at Loyola-Stritch School of Medicine in Chicago. Montolongo spends his days in a brightly lit lab researching the root causes of urinary tract infections. “It’s bittersweet to have found something you’re happy doing, knowing it might be taken away,” he said.

    Sunny Nakae, the dean of admissions at Loyola-Stritch, said students face “a huge chasm of uncertainty.” Loyola was the first school to actively recruit undocumented students, and has admitted about 30. But even though DACA has been under threat since President Trump’s election, Nakae said she has received more applications from undocumented students this year than ever before.

    There may well be a shortage of doctors, but it’s more due to restricted residencies not because of a lack of suitable medical school candidates. Either Marina et al are real superstars or more likely illegal aliens are getting affirmative action and receiving massively subsidized educations as they displace better qualified native candidates. Giving coveted med school slots and scholarships to illegals is pure clown world. Let me see the polling on that.

    Moreover, we are supposed to pretend this is typical and that there’s no way any of the dreamers could be gangbangers, dropouts, single moms, welfare sponges, etc. And of course amnesty would never incentivize more illegal immigration. Trust us this time.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/09/daca-med-students-face-uncertain-futures/538695/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dump Trump

    There may well be a shortage of doctors, but it’s more due to restricted residencies not because of a lack of suitable medical school candidates. Either Marina et al are real superstars or more likely illegal aliens are getting affirmative action and receiving massively subsidized educations as they displace better qualified native candidates. Giving coveted med school slots and scholarships to illegals is pure clown world. Let me see the polling on that.
     
    Exactly. Those scholarships should've gone to native born citizens or legal immigrants, many would've loved to attend medical school but didn't because they couldn't afford it.

    What I don't understand is why they couldn't just give these DACA students F1 visa's and treat them like foreign students, that's what they really are. They should be made to pay their own way just like all other foreign students. If they want to stay and work after graduation they should apply for H1b just like foreign students. Why should they be allowed to jump the queue after their parents have been enjoying all the benefits without paying taxes for all the years of their K-12 schooling?

    What % of these DACA people are college grads, and what % are actually STEM majors? Trump could've at least demanded these stats before caving in. I'm willing to bet an overwhelming majority of them are libart majors who went to shit schools. The last thing we need is more libart majoring libtards from our colleges! Majority of the foreign students who made their way here legally are probably way smarter than these border crashers.

    , @map
    I don't see what the big deal is. Isn't it a gift to Mexico for all of these brilliant DACA students to be sent back there? Isn't it obvious that an MD-PHD candidate would be enormously beneficial to Mexico? Doesn't the rank exceptionalism of all of the DACA students make them obvious candidates for Mexican residency and citizenship?

    I don't understand. Who wouldn't take these brilliant, hard-working people with all of their human capital? What a gift we would give Latin America. Remember. Diversity is Strength. If we export our diversity, then won't we make them strong?

    Why is language a barrier? Can't they learn Spanish. I mean, their illegal parents learned English.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. guest says:
    @larry lurker
    I think it was an iSteve commenter who put it this way a few months back: "It's as if your weatherman said there was a 30% chance of rain today ... and it rains."

    I used this analogy recently with an acquaintance who was upset at Silver's giving Trump 28% odds when he obviously should have had 100% odds, and he sneered: "So let me get this straight: You're saying Nate Silver is about as reliable as a weatherman?"

    "Well, yeah. They're not fortune tellers." We moved on.

    For some reason people are stuck on the odds part. Look, it wouldn’t matter to me if Silver guessed wrong, because predicting elections isn’t easy. But it’s obvious that he gave Trump such bad odds because he trusted the polls. He couldn’t tell the polls were wrong, and analyzing polls is really his only job. So what good is he? Why are we listening to him?

    Weathermen presumably have meteorological training and can guess better than the man on the street, even if they don’t guess well. With the last election, if you gave the man in the street no information but that it was Candidate X versus Candidate Y, if he was smart he’d just give each 50/50 odds. That’s better than Nate Silver’s prediction. So why did he waste all that time thinking and number-crunching?

    Weather prognostication at least has some basis in science. Nate Silvering comes down to belief in Magic Polls.

    Read More
    • Replies: @larry lurker

    For some reason people are stuck on the odds part. Look, it wouldn’t matter to me if Silver guessed wrong, because predicting elections isn’t easy. But it’s obvious that he gave Trump such bad odds because he trusted the polls.
     
    How is 28% "such bad odds"? That's basically Russian roulette with two rounds - not exactly once-in-a-lifetime odds for a US presidential election.

    Huffington Post was giving Trump, what, 2% odds? The Asian guy from Princeton - 1% odds? 1% means you wouldn't expect it to happen even once from the founding of the country until present day. Those are bad odds!

    Silver trusted the polls because those same polls allowed him to predict 49 out of 50 states correctly in 2008 and 50 out of 50 states correctly in 2012. We now know that in 2016 many voters were lying to pollsters, even during the exit polls. Silver accounted for this by taking into account the conspicuous number of undecideds, which pushed the odds closer to 50/50. HuffPo apparently made no such adjustment, hence their enormous overconfidence in the losing candidate.

    If Silver had taken into account - for example - stories of people being beaten half to death for publicly expressing their support for Trump (stories that surely helped Greg Cochran make his prediction on the morning of the election), he might have given Trump over 50% odds, but he also would have been engaging in something like punditry - something he had been excoriated for doing during the Republican primaries.

    It's good to have someone out there trying to make predictions based solely on publicly available polling data, someone who doesn't completely suck at it. The cylinder was spun, the trigger was pulled, the gun went off. Silver told us there were two rounds in the gun; virtually everyone else said the gun wasn't loaded. Moral victory for Silver.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Kevin C. says:
    @Wilkey
    "This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that’s especially difficult to accomplish."

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it. Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court. Our laws are ignored all the time. Our Constitution is ignored all the time.

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it.

    Sure, but that will never happen, because right-wing SCOTUS appointees, no matter how far right, move inevitably to the left, while left-wing SCOTUS appointees… stay the same or move further left. Plus, right-wing judges are rightly disdainful of the sort of sophistry (of which leftist judges are experts) that would be necessary to somehow read birthright citizenship out of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship clause: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

    A right-wing SCOTUS is a pipe dream, let alone one that would engage in the sort of judicial activism necessary to do this.

    Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court.

    Perhaps leftist politicians could get away with doing this, but let a righty try and the screams of “separation of powers” and “far-right jackboots” will be deafening until the offender is removed, perhaps even jailed (remember, the US Marshalls are part of the Judicial branch, and part of their job is enforcing Federal court orders).

    Our laws are ignored all the time.

    By leftists, who are the ones who get to decide which laws-on-paper actually count and which don’t; who decide which masked men are in violation of the anti-Klan laws and which are free to hide their faces as they set about their mob action; who the cops are to arrest for the “hate crime” of defending themselves from “youths” who “dindu nuffin’”, and who the cops are to give “space to destroy”.

    Our Constitution is ignored all the time.

    Again, by leftists, who are the ones who rule. As the Romans said, quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi; what is permissible to Jove is not permissible to an ox. The Rulers have always been able to violate the same laws they enforce upon the Ruled. They can get away with doing such things, but we cannot, and will be punished most severely if we try.

    The war between the American Left and Right is not being waged now, but in fact, it is already over: the Left won. Completely. We are a defeated tribe, as much as any Reservation Indian. Hence the rise of white opiate deaths. Like Indians on the rez slowly drinking themselves to death, these are the actions of a defeated people who know the future belongs to the enemy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
     
    That's the operative clause.

    Leftists pretend it's superfluous, but the Canons of Construction yield a presumption against superfluous language (a way of saying that you presume that a drafter didn't put extra meaningless words in and that they're there for a purpose).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Kevin C. says:
    @Anon
    All those who are angry with Trump should diagnose the power that pressured him to change his mind.

    People got him into the highest office, but it is dominated by the old players.

    It's like parents can work and slave to send their kid to good college... but the kid is gonna come under domination of prog professors.

    Trump was sent to top school by the people but he got schooled by the tenured professors.

    People got him into the highest office, but it is dominated by the old players.

    It’s like parents can work and slave to send their kid to good college… but the kid is gonna come under domination of prog professors.

    Trump was sent to top school by the people but he got schooled by the tenured professors.

    Exactly. It’s the unelected “old players”, not any merely-elected president, who are really in charge. And what they say goes, no matter how much “we the people” oppose it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Kevin C.

    permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty.
     
    Once again, I find myself perplexed how people can think this matters. Because once elected, these fresh faces who promise up and down they'll be different will quickly become just another bunch of John McCains and Lindsey Grahams. Because that's the only thing a Republican Congress-critter is allowed to be, it's the job, to put up a valiant show of opposing the Left, and then lose, all the time maintaining kayfabe, to prop up the illusion that Congress is anything other than a mostly powerless, vestigial appendage of the true government, one of "the last remnants of the Old Republic", to quote Wilhuff Tarkin.

    (I'm just waiting to see how long before Gorsuch becomes another John "PPACA is Schrödinger's Tax" Roberts, because it's just a matter of time; right-wing appointees to the Supreme Court moving leftward once on the bench is practically a law of nature.)

    Elections, primary or general, do not accomplish anything. Our unelected Lords and Masters shall rule as they will, and there is naught we peasants can do but suffer their whims.

    My choice of word “hope” reflects an appropriate sense of powerlessness in the face of Jewish domination. That hope is based on a similar insight that led me to, in 1998 state:

    “Check out the ethnicity of the folks at Clinton’s “town meeting” trying to trump up support for a war in the middle east on behalf of Israel—putting the US in a lonely international position and making people like you and I a target for terrorism or a Jewish-inspired Reichstag.”

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/project_megiddo_or_why_james_bowery_should_run_the_fbi/

    That was only one, of a number, of such statements I made during the 1990′s anticipating 9/11/2001 and the consequent disastrous military actions in the middle east.

    When that disaster came to pass, it took me a while to come to the conclusion that a rift between neocons and Likuds had opened up due to the damage done by “invade the world invite the world” — but when Trump made his “Mexican Rapist” speech, I immediately declared him “The Likud Candidate” and gave him a significant chance of winning it all.

    It boils down to this:

    Zionism has one great virtue: It puts Jews in a position where they learn what it takes to _sustainably_ run a nation. Up until the insanity of the Bush thence Obama years, the serious nationalists in Israel hadn’t really learned that the US was 1) Theirs to lose and 2) Being lost due to diaspora Jewish behavior — including neocon as well as Frankfurt School Cultural Marxist excesses.

    I believe they have learned at least to a significant degree — although it may be too little, too late now.

    Read More
    • Agree: Seneca
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Kevin C. says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    Mueller ain't going to do nothing but enjoy some government-paid travel and chow. Mueller has already signalled that he is going to broaden out his focus to just about everything involving Russians, including the alleged use of social media by Russia to "interfere" in elections in the United States. That leads me to believe that Mueller will keep this nonsense open for a while and then submit some kind of vague report about this or that. Mueller is going to go fishing for a time and then say the Russians ain't no good -- Mueller does not want to start a civil war by mucking around in a manner that will piss off President Trump's 60 million voters.

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a great man and one of the best things about the Trump administration.

    Sorry, but you’re just reading things totally backward on Mueller.

    “Mueller has already signalled that he is going to broaden out his focus to just about everything involving Russians, including the alleged use of social media by Russia to “interfere” in elections in the United States.”

    Which means he’s going to keep up casting a wider and wider net until he can find enough “dirt” that our Mass Media can cobble together into a supposed “smoking gun”, to thereby give cover to the cuckservatives and NeverTrumpers among the Congressional GOP to “reluctantly and with great sadness” join the Democrats in impeaching and removing Trump (and thereby establishing GOPe control of the party).

    mucking around in a manner that will piss off President Trump’s 60 million voters.

    So what if “Trump’s 60 million voters” (note, I am part of this group) get “pissed off”? What can we do, but stew impotently in our anger and frustration? Because there’s nothing we can do about it. Are you familiar with the “Bonus Army”, and what happened to them?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Kevin C. says:
    @Frau Katze
    The elite cannot accept that a majority of people are not supportive of mass immigration. Much less illegal immigration.

    They seem to be in some kind of denial.

    But nothing has changed with time or even the country. Throughout the West, mass immigration was imposed on the population. Who then became more and more disenchanted as time went on.

    Why can't they see the obvious?

    The elite cannot accept that a majority of people are not supportive of mass immigration. Much less illegal immigration.

    They seem to be in some kind of denial.

    It’s not that they cannot accept it, it’s that they don’t care. (When have ruling elites ever cared what the filthy peasant masses think?)

    Throughout the West, mass immigration was imposed on the population. Who then became more and more disenchanted as time went on.

    That’s how the world has always worked. Elites impose their will on the powerless population, and the peasants can only suffer their whims. As Thucydides said over 2,400 years ago in the Melian Dialogue, “Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” They are strong, we are weak.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Frau Katze
    And here I thought we lived in democratic countries.

    But your answer is starting to match the facts more and more.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Wilkey
    "This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that’s especially difficult to accomplish."

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it. Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court. Our laws are ignored all the time. Our Constitution is ignored all the time.

    Agreed on all that, Wilkey, but also it is NOT clear-cut that Amendment IV allows for citizenship from anyone born in the US. There is a clause requiring the parents to be under jurisdiction of one of the states, or the Feral Gov’t. I am no constitutional lawyer, but Ann Coulter IS a lawyer, and she wrote about this – on VDare as well as wherever else her column appears. Here is something from VDare, but I swear she wrote another that I couldn’t follow completely on the lawyerly talk about precedents, etc. I can’t find that other one, if it exists at all.

    Ann Coulter could be a “friend of the court”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @guest
    "Hillary allowed Trump to beat out 16 other Republicans? Really?"

    I'm not sure you know how presidential elections work. Trump could've bested 16 billion Republicans. If he doesn't beat out his general election opponent(s), he doesn't get to the White House.

    I’m not sure you know how presidential elections work. Trump could’ve bested 16 billion Republicans. If he doesn’t beat out his general election opponent(s), he doesn’t get to the White House.

    Perhaps you didn’t read through the snippet provided and see the claim 538 is actually making.
    It is titled:

    “Trump’s hardline immigration stance got him to the White House”

    “got him to the White House” not “beat Hillary”.

    Getting to the White House is a process, which for Trump included getting media attention and winning the Republican nomination. Their wrap paragraph makes this clear:

    In 2016, moreover, immigration may have been the issue most responsible for Trump’s winning the Republican nomination. In every state with a caucus or primary exit poll, he did best among voters who said immigration was their top issue.

    I don’t disagree with you that the #1 reason Trump beat Hillary is … “Hillary”. Joe Biden would probably have beaten Trump. Probably a good number of other bland Democrats without such high negatives. But immigration is clearly the #1 issue for why this guy named Trump is there instead of someone else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "Getting to the White House is a process"

    Yeah, the most important part of the process being the general election. Including when the opponent is a walkover, which Hillary wasn't. But she was just bad enough for him to win.

    This article would be better served with a headline about how immigration got Trump to the Republican nomination. But it didn't, probably because this way it gets more clicks.

    Well, I'm taking the headline at its word. As it deserves

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. What kind of negotiation skill is this? He didn’t even use DACA as a bargaining chip, no RAISE act, no wall, he just plain gave it away!

    My worst nightmare has come true, Trump really is as dumb as he sounds.

    The only people who are even dumber are the ones still touting 5D chess or whatever, still sticking with him while he takes the country straight down the abyss.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  81. ACCELERATIONISM is coming whatever Mueller does, but I don’t think Mueller wants to be the bastard that starts something that will involve the destruction of the ruling class. The ruling class already knows the next global financial implosion is on its way, any attempt to remove President Trump from power will bring into question the legitimacy of the United States government. The Deep State wants to continue in power as long as possible.

    The Deep State has some members that see the future; they know the central banks run the scam. The Deep State will activate some heavy duty stuff if they try to remove Trump. The Deep State is looking to blame Trump for the upcoming global financial implosion.

    Check this NY Times’ opinion piece about central banking and asset bubbles. The Deep State knows the jig is up on financialization:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. Make Mexico Great Again!

    Trump has zero credibility left. No one with any brain will ever take him seriously again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    That was quite a reasonable estimate for Trump in the closing stages of this election.

    My personal math–not that anyone cares–had Trump winning 260 or 264 and needing Wisconsin to win. I would have given Trump’s odds in that same 1/3 ballpark. Trump got Wisconsin … *and* Pennsylvania and Michigan. Impressive. But still a razor thin win by < 1% in three states that could have slipped out with the most minor fluctuation in perception of either candidate.

    The plain fact was this was a very difficult election to call. Because both candidates had high negatives and because the press had picked out one candidate–Trump–as their bete noire, beyond the pale, which meant there was an even greater chance of Trump supporters ducking/lying-to pollsters and also a counter-reaction effect to stick it to the highly disliked alternative.

    The key point here is that Silver/538, kept saying Trump's got a decent shot to win this thing, even while huge numbers of pollsters and pontificators were blabbing how it was all over, Hillary was a mortal lock, blah, blah, blah.

    What most certainly did not happen was some sort of Trumpian landslide that Silver/538 and everyone else missed. I think that was possible post-Obama–especially against the crappy and unpleasant Hillary–but would have required a nationalist candidate as energetic, but far more articulate and disciplined than Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    What most certainly did not happen was some sort of Trumpian landslide
     
    No. You're wrong. There was a landslide, because that's what Jack Hanson was predicting.
    , @res
    Agreed, but two additional thoughts. One in Nate's favor, one not.

    538 boosted their estimate right before the election after being negative for an extended period. Here it was 15/17% two weeks before the election: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-why-our-model-is-more-bullish-than-others-on-trump/

    538 was less negative on Trump than most of the MSM though. For example, the Upshot at 15% right before the election (includes a plot of five months worth of their predictions): https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?mcubz=0
    And for possibly the worst see Ryan Grim's 2% chance for Trump prediction: https://www.mediaite.com/online/nate-silver-goes-to-war-with-huffpost-writer-after-highly-critical-column/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @James Bowery
    Bannon leaves the government to take control of Breitbart at the same time Trump appears to "cuck" on immigration.

    Here's what I'm hoping is really going on:

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump's "cucking" may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors. Breitbart would then have to, somehow, capture a lot more mindshare of the Republican base with which to hammer the treasonous incumbents into the ground where they are challenged by patriotic primary candidates. We have a formula for this in the origin of The Drudge Report: Apparently what happened to make Drudge so influential was being fed intelligence by some faction of the Southern California Jewish elite -- perhaps the Mossad-connected Lansky-mob remnants that got Nixon and Reagan elected -- with which Drudge was able to go after Clinton. Similar intelligence could be fed to Bannon to help exploit the credibility chasm that has opened up in mass media "news" -- and power the Breitbart hammer.

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors…

    Still holding out for that 18D chess scenario I see. I’m afraid you’ve given the man too much credit. He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved. Now he’s hated by all. The Dems will never love him, and his base hate him even more, save for a few die-hard fan boys/girls from the Appalachian.

    Give it up. You can tell from the way he talks the man is about an inch deep, with nothing but hot air and a bad comb-over between the ears. He is no thinker or strategic playmaker. He just got outplayed by a cunning Jew. He blusters, lies and then caves completely. He’s as good as dead to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved.

    A buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle wouldn't have stood up for truth and principle as Trump did at that Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.

    , @James Bowery
    If you read my response to another "cynic"

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/538-trumps-hardline-immigration-stance-got-him-to-the-white-house/#comment-2006759

    you'll see my cynicism is quite adequate as nowhere am I presuming that Trump is his own man. And regarding the "cunning Jew", likewise, I've pointed out how the ordinary both-ends-against-the-middle posture of Jews is, because of Zionism's exigencies, turning a hairline crack -- that would ordinarily heal under the heat of ethnic cohesion -- into an irreconcilable chasm.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved.
     
    Thank you for providing the quintessential example of projection. Setting aside your glaring stupidity we can all admire your combination of a lack of self awareness with an inability to see more than one millisecond into the future.

    Your cautionary example is noted.
    , @Realist
    Excellent comments. It is hard to fathom how god damn dumb a person would have to be to defend Trump after his perfidious actions toward his supporters
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @guest
    Regarding gay marriage, that was more often than not a legal issue. Gays didn't have to be too passionate to convince judges as compared to regular folks.

    They did an amazing job propaganda-wise over the last several decades. But there's was not a political victory in the usual sense. Even when it was instituted by elected officials, that doesn't necessarily mean it was with the consent of the electorate.

    Regarding gay marriage, that was more often than not a legal issue. Gays didn’t have to be too passionate to convince judges as compared to regular folks.

    Not really.

    I was early in my legal career but even I can recall that Constitutional arguments for Homosexual Marriage were laughed at out of hand by even liberal law professors. Like, “novel, but not compelling.”

    Specifically, I can recall watching oral argument before the New York Court of Appeals (New York’s highest court) rejecting those arguments as well as arguments under the New York Constitution.

    They just turned the propaganda up to 11.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    In any case, though judges are elected or appointed by elected officials, they're not normally considered political figures. They make political decisions, but they're not persuaded like the people are persuaded to vote a referendum up or down, for instance. Nor how they're convinced to elect representatives to do things on their behalf.

    It's easy for me to see how judges were swayed. The went the New Civil Rights route. Which is a well-worn route.

    Gays didn't have as much success going the popular way. More the what will they say at cocktail parties/what will they teach about my decision at Harvard/Yale/Columbia law? That's my point.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Kevin C.

    Bullshit. All it requires is 5 of 9 Supreme Court justices to *say* the Constitution does not require it.
     
    Sure, but that will never happen, because right-wing SCOTUS appointees, no matter how far right, move inevitably to the left, while left-wing SCOTUS appointees… stay the same or move further left. Plus, right-wing judges are rightly disdainful of the sort of sophistry (of which leftist judges are experts) that would be necessary to somehow read birthright citizenship out of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship clause: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

    A right-wing SCOTUS is a pipe dream, let alone one that would engage in the sort of judicial activism necessary to do this.

    Or for our politicians to simply ignore the Supreme Court.
     
    Perhaps leftist politicians could get away with doing this, but let a righty try and the screams of "separation of powers" and "far-right jackboots" will be deafening until the offender is removed, perhaps even jailed (remember, the US Marshalls are part of the Judicial branch, and part of their job is enforcing Federal court orders).

    Our laws are ignored all the time.
     
    By leftists, who are the ones who get to decide which laws-on-paper actually count and which don't; who decide which masked men are in violation of the anti-Klan laws and which are free to hide their faces as they set about their mob action; who the cops are to arrest for the "hate crime" of defending themselves from "youths" who "dindu nuffin'", and who the cops are to give "space to destroy".

    Our Constitution is ignored all the time.
     
    Again, by leftists, who are the ones who rule. As the Romans said, quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi; what is permissible to Jove is not permissible to an ox. The Rulers have always been able to violate the same laws they enforce upon the Ruled. They can get away with doing such things, but we cannot, and will be punished most severely if we try.

    The war between the American Left and Right is not being waged now, but in fact, it is already over: the Left won. Completely. We are a defeated tribe, as much as any Reservation Indian. Hence the rise of white opiate deaths. Like Indians on the rez slowly drinking themselves to death, these are the actions of a defeated people who know the future belongs to the enemy.

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

    That’s the operative clause.

    Leftists pretend it’s superfluous, but the Canons of Construction yield a presumption against superfluous language (a way of saying that you presume that a drafter didn’t put extra meaningless words in and that they’re there for a purpose).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    Except, how are people physically in the US not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"? If you research the history of the Amendment, that clause refers specifically to those Indian tribes who were considered "sovereign nations", with their own territorial enclaves within the US borders. I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of "jurisdiction" in both domestic and international law, and is frankly arrant sophistry. The plain meaning of those words is indeed jus soli, and no amount of wishful thinking will change that, only another Amendment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible “path to citizenship” might even be left open, as long as it wasn’t automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn’t bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries.

    Brilliant. But I wouldn’t hold my breath for Trump to do this. He’s dumber than a box of rocks. Even immigrant/refugee hugging Paul Ryan rejected the plan holding out for better border security, that just tells you how bad this deal is.

    The IQ of America just collectively dropped by another 10 points today. We are inching ever closer to Mexico’s level of IQ. In fact pretty soon Mexico’s IQ could be higher than ours, as they continue to dump their illiterate fruit pickers and gang members on us.

    Today’s the day Trump stuck a fork in America. We have finally passed the point of no return.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Detective Club
    Meanwhile, back at the ranch : Trump hit TWITTER this morning, in bigly fashion. Yesterday's DACA "deal" with Chuck Schumer & senile Pelosi may not be a deal after all. If the 2 million strong and gray-haired DACA kids get their GOP Amnesty, there will have to be a 15 billion dollar appropriation for The Wall or a permanent reduction in "legal" immigration. No deal with The Trumpster is ever final until the ink is dry.

    Long story short : if Trump signs DACA as a "stand-alone," which is to say that he gets nothing in return for signing a flat out Amnesty bill (see above), his Presidency will end up as a smoldering pile of burnt toast. Many empty seats at the next Trump rally, bigly, really bigly.

    Meanwhile, back in the darkest recesses of the US House of Representatives : Paul Ryan is shitting bricks. Ryan may want DACA as a "stand-alone" with all his heart and soul, but if he rams a “clean” DACA bill through with Dem. votes and a few Rep. RINOs, Wisconsin’s Eddie Munster will be out of a job and will be forced to ask his rich wife for the keys, every time he wants to take the family limo out for a spin!

    Meanwhile, back in the darkest recesses of the US House of Representatives : Paul Ryan is shitting bricks. Ryan may want DACA as a “stand-alone” with all his heart and soul, but if he rams a “clean” DACA bill through with Dem. votes and a few Rep. RINOs, Wisconsin’s Eddie Munster will be out of a job and will be forced to ask his rich wife for the keys, every time he wants to take the family limo out for a spin!

    I wouldn’t bet on it. Wisconsinites are a bunch of cucks who elected this POS umpteen times in the first place. They went for Obama in 2012.

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier
    I agree with you 100 percent.

    The electorate cannot be trusted to do the right thing on almost any issue that is critically important to the survival of the Republic.

    If their wisdom was as vaunted as one might hope, traitorous scum like Ryan and McCain would never have been re-elected over and over and over again.

    If you pin your hopes on the wisdom of the electorate you will inevitably be disappointed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Silver at this moment can afford to compliment The Orangutan from Queens with Real Facts & Figures….

    Why?

    Because 538 already has headliner ready for 2020:

    “Trump’s Softened Immigration Stance Got Him Out From The White House.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. bored identity just can’t take seriously any moneyballing wizard whose hideously-hilarious scalped cranium denies 93% mathematical probability of his genetic polling rejecting results of the latest follicular transplantation.

    Maybe FiveThreeEight could cook some Miracle-Growth algorithms to comfort Nate’s alopecic narcissism….

    That wouldn’t be their first time, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. Congratulations! The tribe wins again.

    The country is once again F over by a liberal Jew. What else is new? There will be no letting up by the tribe until America is a complete failed state. We’re already 75% of the way there after the last 3 failed presidents. Trump is here to finish the job, with the tribe firmly by his side. This time they even made sure of it by marrying their way in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  92. @John Gruskos
    Stephen Miller is the man most responsible for convincing American nationalist conservatives to vote for Trump, not Cruz or Paul, in the primaries, and to vote for Trump, not Darrel Castle, in the general election.

    Lesson learned.

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner's father-in-law.

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner’s father-in-law.

    Oh please!

    I stand behind no one in opposing Jewish minoritarianism. It has been an extremely successful ideology–pushed by Hollyweird, the media, academia–in undermining the West and creating this crisis of survival.

    But it’s just stupid to bad mouth, alienate and push out Jews who are on the side of whites/the West. We want Jews to cut the hostile minoritarianism and act like normal white people … and then when one does so you want to piss on him? Not just “unhelpful”, but deeply stupid.

    Miller cut his teeth on this ugly leftist Duke Lacrosse “rape” fraud. He’s been in the trenches on immigration sanity for Sessions–which included defeating the gang of 8 amnesty (saving America) and which also means the sensible immigration policy Trump borrowed from him. He’s been speech writer behind of a lot of the best, most-sensible lines Trump has said. And Miller’s about the only serious nationalist left in the White House.

    And you’re going to link him with a typical Jewish bozo like Jared Kushner because they are both Jews?

    That Trump is flakey and unsteady is not Miller’s fault. Even flakey Trump was still a damn sight better and tougher on civilizational survival than Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Miller has done more *himself* to save the West than Paul or Cruz ever done. And if there had been a great nationalist candidate better than Trump–Miller would have been there. His judgment looks pretty darn sound to me. Miller is the real deal. A guy who wants to save the nation.

    Read More
    • Disagree: Opinionator
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    I meant to hit "Agree" there! A very, very strong agree.

    Miller is already deserving of the highest American honor. He would be deserving of knighthood if we had such things.

    Let's not write Kushner off either. He doesn't compare to Miller--few people would--but his heart may be in the right place. He is in an unfamiliar and difficult situation.
    , @John Gruskos
    Against my own misgivings I supported Trump - maximum donations allowable by law, persuading all my family and friends to support Trump, putting my reputation on the line, volunteering in the phone banks, putting Trump signs in my front yard despite vandalism, going to rallies despite Antifa harassment (they apparently do their homework, recognized me and attacked me by name as I walked by).

    Why? Because I admired, respected and trusted Miller.

    I still admire and respect the man, but I no longer trust his judgement as much as I once did.

    I think he so much wanted to believe that a man with Trump's friends and family could be America's savior, he ignored the warning signs. I made the exact same mistake, but I expect my heroes to be smarter than myself.

    Rand Paul wouldn't have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. J.Ross says: • Website

    Last night /pol/ was rendered alnost unusable by uncountable new threads, all starting at the same time, and thereafter illegally reposting existing material. And all of them said, “Trump caved, he betrayed you, it’s all over.” Many affected the imagined voice of legitimate /pol/ users. This crowd thinks we are violent teenaged virgins with Tourrette’s Syndrome, and a willingness to turn on Trump on the slightest pretext, so it’s pretty easy to see what’s happening.
    Hey. Unz users. I know how to defeat Big Brother. It’s easy.
    Did every voice in the Nepotism Network scream at you that Trump is dead? Then Trump is alive.
    Repeat this model with new values as often as is needed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @27 year old
    Commenter Dump Trump is doing that in this thread
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't care about slash pol slash. It sounds like Donald Trump is a worthless fool, but I always keep my hopes up. I don't see the commenters you are talking about on here, as most of us think for ourselves.

    Sometimes you hear something a lot because the people are right! (Not on TV, I mean - there it's 24/7 BS)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    Some very good ideas here. But it seems like more than the RAISE Act should be coming the other way. DACA is the only obvious bargaining chip Americans have. And RAISE Act itself is weak sauce. They should ask for everything now–all of it is reasonable and can be made broadly compelling with good advocacy–and put the anti-borders forces to the choice of screwing Dreamers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. In the comments section of an on-line article in the NYT today about Trump’s about-face on DACA and the wall, I found this one jewel of clarity:

    “He’s finished, and won’t be reelected. The Great Wall was the reason he won. He won because it looked like he was going to be the first modern president to actually have the moral courage to do what was necessary to stop the millions of people south of our border who seem to believe they have some inalienable right to come here in search of a bigger paycheck without complying with the laws of our nation. The poisonous compact between the rapacious masters of capitalism who want the cheapest labor possible and the blue-state bleeding hearts for whom signaling virtue and treating “deplorable” working poor Americans with a combination of neglect and contempt are defining features (i.e., “oppressed” foreign masses > “privileged” American poor) triumphs again. It was a predictable outcome, and the millions of us who hoped against hope should have known better.”

    In terms of the number of “likes” this comment has received it appears to be the least popular “NYT Pick” of all time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. 3g4me says:
    @guest
    "America likes Mexicans"

    America likes Mexican food. That's about as far as it goes. We don't really need Mexicans for that.

    @59 Guest: “America likes Mexican food.”

    I despise Mexican food. Give me Moroccan, Lebanese, Turkish, Hungarian, and I’m happy and fat. Not the people, please note (except for the Hungarians – saw some amazing looking people while in Budapest) – just the food. You can keep Mexican Mestizos and tacos and beans and even tequila – America will be better of without them all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KM32
    Sorry, but Mexican food is delicious, and most people love it.

    I'm trying to look on the bright side here. The world hardly needs another Hispanic nation, but if we're lucky, the Hispanic tidal wave will save us from Islam and/or Africa. Civilization can rebound in 5-15 generations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @AnotherDad

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner’s father-in-law.
     
    Oh please!

    I stand behind no one in opposing Jewish minoritarianism. It has been an extremely successful ideology--pushed by Hollyweird, the media, academia--in undermining the West and creating this crisis of survival.

    But it's just stupid to bad mouth, alienate and push out Jews who are on the side of whites/the West. We want Jews to cut the hostile minoritarianism and act like normal white people ... and then when one does so you want to piss on him? Not just "unhelpful", but deeply stupid.

    Miller cut his teeth on this ugly leftist Duke Lacrosse "rape" fraud. He's been in the trenches on immigration sanity for Sessions--which included defeating the gang of 8 amnesty (saving America) and which also means the sensible immigration policy Trump borrowed from him. He's been speech writer behind of a lot of the best, most-sensible lines Trump has said. And Miller's about the only serious nationalist left in the White House.

    And you're going to link him with a typical Jewish bozo like Jared Kushner because they are both Jews?

    That Trump is flakey and unsteady is not Miller's fault. Even flakey Trump was still a damn sight better and tougher on civilizational survival than Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Miller has done more *himself* to save the West than Paul or Cruz ever done. And if there had been a great nationalist candidate better than Trump--Miller would have been there. His judgment looks pretty darn sound to me. Miller is the real deal. A guy who wants to save the nation.

    I meant to hit “Agree” there! A very, very strong agree.

    Miller is already deserving of the highest American honor. He would be deserving of knighthood if we had such things.

    Let’s not write Kushner off either. He doesn’t compare to Miller–few people would–but his heart may be in the right place. He is in an unfamiliar and difficult situation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Gruskos
    "Let’s not write Kushner off"

    Kushner is the #1 reason why Donald Trump, who ran as Pat Buchanan, is now governing as Hillary Clinton.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @Dump Trump

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors...
     
    Still holding out for that 18D chess scenario I see. I'm afraid you've given the man too much credit. He's a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved. Now he's hated by all. The Dems will never love him, and his base hate him even more, save for a few die-hard fan boys/girls from the Appalachian.

    Give it up. You can tell from the way he talks the man is about an inch deep, with nothing but hot air and a bad comb-over between the ears. He is no thinker or strategic playmaker. He just got outplayed by a cunning Jew. He blusters, lies and then caves completely. He's as good as dead to me.

    He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved.

    A buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle wouldn’t have stood up for truth and principle as Trump did at that Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    A buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle wouldn’t have stood up for truth and principle as Trump did at that Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.
     
    Darn good point Opinionator. Trump could have done better calling out antifa thugs by name and continual leftist totalitarian speech suppression. But in the context of the moment and the media's lock step fake narrative it was impressive. Trump alone stood up for truth while the cucks were mewling.

    That's the thing with Trump. The guy's efforts with be confused, incoherent, or he looks to be rolling over ... and then suddenly there's this flash of an actual man of principle. Chaotic--as with all things Trump--but distinctly there. That's what makes Trump so darn frustrating. But I guess it beats swallowing the black pill.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. KM32 says:
    @3g4me
    @59 Guest: "America likes Mexican food."

    I despise Mexican food. Give me Moroccan, Lebanese, Turkish, Hungarian, and I'm happy and fat. Not the people, please note (except for the Hungarians - saw some amazing looking people while in Budapest) - just the food. You can keep Mexican Mestizos and tacos and beans and even tequila - America will be better of without them all.

    Sorry, but Mexican food is delicious, and most people love it.

    I’m trying to look on the bright side here. The world hardly needs another Hispanic nation, but if we’re lucky, the Hispanic tidal wave will save us from Islam and/or Africa. Civilization can rebound in 5-15 generations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Agree: Mexican food

    Disagree: Mexican zeros=Mexican zorros/Mexican chefs=Captain America
    , @Dmitry134564
    We are all aware that Mexico is somewhat of a failed country, much like India, Russia, Brazil etc. But I need to read more negative data on the actual impact of the specific Mexican immigrants we are getting (such as their unemployment rates), before making a judgement.

    There are some immigrants from not very successful countries, who nonetheless can add to the country a lot in terms of skills, patriotic feeling and education. The country doesn't always tell you everything about the immigrants who come from that country - if you got the intellectual elite of Mexico (I'm not saying that's happening at all!), then I would be hard pressed to see it as bad.

    , @guest
    There can be some kind of Western Civilization with a largely Latin American U.S. Muslims would simply destroy it. Latins are Christian, at least, and have much European blood.

    But it won't be historical U.S. civilization. Which is based largely on English civilization. It won't be Northwest European civilization, which is somewhat assimilable to English-cum-American civilization.

    The country simply wouldn't be the U.S. anymore. It would be the Zombie U.S. at best.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @gregor
    I came across a particularly aggressive example of DACA boosterism recently in the Atlantic. The article is about DACA medical students.

    I reached Marina Di Bartolo, an internal-medicine doctor at the University of Pennsylvania, on her walk home from the clinic on Thursday. That day, she treated a patient with high blood pressure, another who needed cataract surgery, and someone with a herniated disc from bungee jumping gone wrong. “Not the most glamorous stuff,” she said.

    Di Bartolo’s parents brought her from Venezuela at age 7, then overstayed their tourist visas. Her mother works as a babysitter and housekeeper, and her father does odd jobs and construction.
     

    Very representative, I'm sure. But even in these examples cherry-picked for maximal sympathy, there are still several points that will make anyone but the most committed lib raise an eyebrow.

    Meanwhile, the United States faces a shortage of up to 104,900 physicians, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

    Di Bartolo won a full scholarship to the Yale School of Medicine, and to Princeton before that. But for students who rely on financial aid, the end of DACA would mean they can no longer afford school for a simple reason: Few banks are eager to lend to students legally prohibited from working after graduation.

    “I won’t be able to pay my living expenses, much less my tuition” without loans, said Cesar Montolongo, a professorial MD-Ph.D. student at Loyola-Stritch School of Medicine in Chicago. Montolongo spends his days in a brightly lit lab researching the root causes of urinary tract infections. “It’s bittersweet to have found something you’re happy doing, knowing it might be taken away,” he said.

    Sunny Nakae, the dean of admissions at Loyola-Stritch, said students face “a huge chasm of uncertainty.” Loyola was the first school to actively recruit undocumented students, and has admitted about 30. But even though DACA has been under threat since President Trump’s election, Nakae said she has received more applications from undocumented students this year than ever before.
     

    There may well be a shortage of doctors, but it's more due to restricted residencies not because of a lack of suitable medical school candidates. Either Marina et al are real superstars or more likely illegal aliens are getting affirmative action and receiving massively subsidized educations as they displace better qualified native candidates. Giving coveted med school slots and scholarships to illegals is pure clown world. Let me see the polling on that.

    Moreover, we are supposed to pretend this is typical and that there's no way any of the dreamers could be gangbangers, dropouts, single moms, welfare sponges, etc. And of course amnesty would never incentivize more illegal immigration. Trust us this time.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/09/daca-med-students-face-uncertain-futures/538695/

    There may well be a shortage of doctors, but it’s more due to restricted residencies not because of a lack of suitable medical school candidates. Either Marina et al are real superstars or more likely illegal aliens are getting affirmative action and receiving massively subsidized educations as they displace better qualified native candidates. Giving coveted med school slots and scholarships to illegals is pure clown world. Let me see the polling on that.

    Exactly. Those scholarships should’ve gone to native born citizens or legal immigrants, many would’ve loved to attend medical school but didn’t because they couldn’t afford it.

    What I don’t understand is why they couldn’t just give these DACA students F1 visa’s and treat them like foreign students, that’s what they really are. They should be made to pay their own way just like all other foreign students. If they want to stay and work after graduation they should apply for H1b just like foreign students. Why should they be allowed to jump the queue after their parents have been enjoying all the benefits without paying taxes for all the years of their K-12 schooling?

    What % of these DACA people are college grads, and what % are actually STEM majors? Trump could’ve at least demanded these stats before caving in. I’m willing to bet an overwhelming majority of them are libart majors who went to shit schools. The last thing we need is more libart majoring libtards from our colleges! Majority of the foreign students who made their way here legally are probably way smarter than these border crashers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @Dump Trump

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors...
     
    Still holding out for that 18D chess scenario I see. I'm afraid you've given the man too much credit. He's a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved. Now he's hated by all. The Dems will never love him, and his base hate him even more, save for a few die-hard fan boys/girls from the Appalachian.

    Give it up. You can tell from the way he talks the man is about an inch deep, with nothing but hot air and a bad comb-over between the ears. He is no thinker or strategic playmaker. He just got outplayed by a cunning Jew. He blusters, lies and then caves completely. He's as good as dead to me.

    If you read my response to another “cynic”

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/538-trumps-hardline-immigration-stance-got-him-to-the-white-house/#comment-2006759

    you’ll see my cynicism is quite adequate as nowhere am I presuming that Trump is his own man. And regarding the “cunning Jew”, likewise, I’ve pointed out how the ordinary both-ends-against-the-middle posture of Jews is, because of Zionism’s exigencies, turning a hairline crack — that would ordinarily heal under the heat of ethnic cohesion — into an irreconcilable chasm.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. “Democratic position on many specific immigration policy questions is more popular than the Republican position,”

    Has anybody ever seen a large scal survey of the electorate in general on immigration preferences?

    ” senators with more hardline positions have done better against primary challengers; those with more moderate views have done worse.”

    only in the diseased minds of the corporate media whores is the destruction of the country by importing unlimited numbers of pig-ignorant violent peasants a “moderate view”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
    Dave Brat took out Cantor largely b/c of daves sensible and firm positions on immigration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @anon456
    "Immigration" includes several issues. Namely two. Are you OK with more Mexicans? What about Muslims?

    America likes Mexicans but detests Muslim refugees. I doubt opposing Mexican immigration is what got Trump elected. But wanting to stop Muslim refugee admissions sure did.

    I doubt opposing Mexican immigration is what got Trump elected.

    Wrong. Trump’s candidacy announcement on June 16, 2015 is what made his
    presidency possible:

    His lines on Mexican and other Latin American invaders was the big news that week, resulting in gasps of horror and derision from the MSM. Millions of MAGA voters were suddenly minted that week, but the pollsters and RINOs and most of the left either didn’t (or didn’t want to) recognize it.

    Three days later on Bill Maher’s show, Ann Coulter matter-of-factly called it correctly:

    Regarding the announcement video I linked to: It’s from Trump’s official YouTube campaign channel “Donald J. Trump for President.” It racked up 2,778,000 views and is now “unlisted” by the channel admin, the only searchable videos being stuff from after the inauguration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Was it Trump's prejudice against Mexicans that appealed to voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania or was it his defiance against politically correct norms, the same ones that are actively encouraging black lives matters and doing damage to Midwestern cities?

    I doubt people in economically depressed parts of the Midwest see many Mexicans and would not spend much time thinking about them.

    So it was not Trump's hardline against Mexican immigration that carried his campaign. It was his anti-political correctness embodied in his message denigrating Mexicans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @AnotherDad

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.
     
    That was quite a reasonable estimate for Trump in the closing stages of this election.

    My personal math--not that anyone cares--had Trump winning 260 or 264 and needing Wisconsin to win. I would have given Trump's odds in that same 1/3 ballpark. Trump got Wisconsin ... *and* Pennsylvania and Michigan. Impressive. But still a razor thin win by < 1% in three states that could have slipped out with the most minor fluctuation in perception of either candidate.

    The plain fact was this was a very difficult election to call. Because both candidates had high negatives and because the press had picked out one candidate--Trump--as their bete noire, beyond the pale, which meant there was an even greater chance of Trump supporters ducking/lying-to pollsters and also a counter-reaction effect to stick it to the highly disliked alternative.

    The key point here is that Silver/538, kept saying Trump's got a decent shot to win this thing, even while huge numbers of pollsters and pontificators were blabbing how it was all over, Hillary was a mortal lock, blah, blah, blah.

    What most certainly did not happen was some sort of Trumpian landslide that Silver/538 and everyone else missed. I think that was possible post-Obama--especially against the crappy and unpleasant Hillary--but would have required a nationalist candidate as energetic, but far more articulate and disciplined than Trump.

    What most certainly did not happen was some sort of Trumpian landslide

    No. You’re wrong. There was a landslide, because that’s what Jack Hanson was predicting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. boy am I confused by the Chucky-Nancy-Donald-DACA talk.

    My “dream” is that Donald plays “Lucy” to Chucky’s “Charlie Brown” and yanks the football out from under him.

    The Donald could say, “The American people made their voices clear – no amnesty – enforcement only – sorry Chucky!” – with a big Trump grin.
    I hope.

    Donald – call Ann Coulter! Please!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I hope you are right too, Sarah Toga (is that as in Cherokee 6, btw?), but the experienced side of me doubts it very much.

    To explain, Lucy represents any of the elected politicians, and this time it represents President Trump. Charlie Brown represents the voters. The football could be a secure border, end of affirmative action, balancing of the budget (haha, I just tossed in that last 40 year-old football for "kicks" - it may not have air in it), whatever the voters want.

    Charles Schultz, the writer, did not really state that Lucy was a bipolar hermaphrodite, with some parts that represent the Red, or stupid, wing and some that represent the Blue, or evil, wing of herself - "The PARTY". When Lucy performs self-abuse - this is known as bi-partisanship. (No, you won't see that on prime time - maybe CSPAN).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @KM32
    Sorry, but Mexican food is delicious, and most people love it.

    I'm trying to look on the bright side here. The world hardly needs another Hispanic nation, but if we're lucky, the Hispanic tidal wave will save us from Islam and/or Africa. Civilization can rebound in 5-15 generations.

    Agree: Mexican food

    Disagree: Mexican zeros=Mexican zorros/Mexican chefs=Captain America

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Kevin C. says:
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
     
    That's the operative clause.

    Leftists pretend it's superfluous, but the Canons of Construction yield a presumption against superfluous language (a way of saying that you presume that a drafter didn't put extra meaningless words in and that they're there for a purpose).

    Except, how are people physically in the US not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”? If you research the history of the Amendment, that clause refers specifically to those Indian tribes who were considered “sovereign nations”, with their own territorial enclaves within the US borders. I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow “not subject to the jurisdiction” of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of “jurisdiction” in both domestic and international law, and is frankly arrant sophistry. The plain meaning of those words is indeed jus soli, and no amount of wishful thinking will change that, only another Amendment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Except, how are people physically in the US not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”?

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner. Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.
    , @TangoMan
    I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow “not subject to the jurisdiction” of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of “jurisdiction” in both domestic and international law,

    There's a lot of confusion on this point and that clause. Does anything change if you remove that clause? Nothing changes. The US had enforcement authority against people in the US illegally right from the start, so the clause is not needed with respect to enforcement of laws and citizenship. The confusion arises from standard meaning. It's historical meaning that is the key point here and the historical meaning of jurisdiction is people who owe allegiance to another sovereign. If you didn't qualify as a citizen of America then you were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. You could still be arrested and deported by US official even if you weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    “They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. ”

    Nonsensense. Where is the moral argument that children get to keep what their parents stole.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jb
    No, it's isn't nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don't punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can't repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can't go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That's just the way the world works -- our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors' prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here's the thing: if you really can't understand that it's immoral to deport someone to a country they don't remember, where they don't even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that's what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Kevin C.

    The elite cannot accept that a majority of people are not supportive of mass immigration. Much less illegal immigration.

    They seem to be in some kind of denial.
     
    It's not that they cannot accept it, it's that they don't care. (When have ruling elites ever cared what the filthy peasant masses think?)

    Throughout the West, mass immigration was imposed on the population. Who then became more and more disenchanted as time went on.
     
    That's how the world has always worked. Elites impose their will on the powerless population, and the peasants can only suffer their whims. As Thucydides said over 2,400 years ago in the Melian Dialogue, "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." They are strong, we are weak.

    And here I thought we lived in democratic countries.

    But your answer is starting to match the facts more and more.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    And here I thought we lived in democratic countries.
     
    Democracy is always to a great degree a sham and myth, most "real" when the polity is small and the electorate is limited to the elite, as with the Athenian Democracy, where the franchised adult male citizens made up a tiny fraction of the population. And even then, much of the voters were merely under the sway of one or another demagogue (from the Ancient Greek δημαγωγός "leader of people"). Plus, what we mainly think of as "Athenian Democracy" lasted about a century; even by the broadest definitions, it doesn't even clear two centuries.

    So yes, in our massive, diverse nation with universal franchise, democracy is a sham, with elites using the opinion-forming institutions (academia, the mass media megaphone) to manufacture the veneer of legitimacy for their autocratic power.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @AnotherDad

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner’s father-in-law.
     
    Oh please!

    I stand behind no one in opposing Jewish minoritarianism. It has been an extremely successful ideology--pushed by Hollyweird, the media, academia--in undermining the West and creating this crisis of survival.

    But it's just stupid to bad mouth, alienate and push out Jews who are on the side of whites/the West. We want Jews to cut the hostile minoritarianism and act like normal white people ... and then when one does so you want to piss on him? Not just "unhelpful", but deeply stupid.

    Miller cut his teeth on this ugly leftist Duke Lacrosse "rape" fraud. He's been in the trenches on immigration sanity for Sessions--which included defeating the gang of 8 amnesty (saving America) and which also means the sensible immigration policy Trump borrowed from him. He's been speech writer behind of a lot of the best, most-sensible lines Trump has said. And Miller's about the only serious nationalist left in the White House.

    And you're going to link him with a typical Jewish bozo like Jared Kushner because they are both Jews?

    That Trump is flakey and unsteady is not Miller's fault. Even flakey Trump was still a damn sight better and tougher on civilizational survival than Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Miller has done more *himself* to save the West than Paul or Cruz ever done. And if there had been a great nationalist candidate better than Trump--Miller would have been there. His judgment looks pretty darn sound to me. Miller is the real deal. A guy who wants to save the nation.

    Against my own misgivings I supported Trump – maximum donations allowable by law, persuading all my family and friends to support Trump, putting my reputation on the line, volunteering in the phone banks, putting Trump signs in my front yard despite vandalism, going to rallies despite Antifa harassment (they apparently do their homework, recognized me and attacked me by name as I walked by).

    Why? Because I admired, respected and trusted Miller.

    I still admire and respect the man, but I no longer trust his judgement as much as I once did.

    I think he so much wanted to believe that a man with Trump’s friends and family could be America’s savior, he ignored the warning signs. I made the exact same mistake, but I expect my heroes to be smarter than myself.

    Rand Paul wouldn’t have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Rand Paul wouldn’t have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.


    As failed Republican candidates, neither would have done anything and it is pure speculation that Cruz would have done anything with DACA. DAPA was already illegal.
    , @Ed
    Don't lose hope. This is bigger than this fool Trump. Miller is working behind the scenes. It appears Sessions or his allies are leaking damaging info about Trump.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    Neither Rand Paul nor Ted Cruz would have made immigration the central issue of the campaign. Whatever happens from here forward, Trump should be lauded for putting immigration front and center on the table of American political dialogue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. MarkinLA says:
    @John Gruskos
    Stephen Miller is the man most responsible for convincing American nationalist conservatives to vote for Trump, not Cruz or Paul, in the primaries, and to vote for Trump, not Darrel Castle, in the general election.

    Lesson learned.

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner's father-in-law.

    All you people still whining about Cruz and why you were so right about Trump have to get this one big fact through your thick heads:

    HILLARY WOULD HAVE WIPED THE FLOOR WITH CRUZ

    So what good would a Cruz nomination have been? Cruz was also for some accommodation of the Dreamers and other long time illegals – just not citizenship. He was a globalist like his wife and Hillary. Just how does Cruz get the electoral college votes for Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan?

    Do you really think Cruz would have “outdebated” Hillary and the American public would have magically changed their view of Cruz. Cruz was just as unlikable as Hillary but Cruz was a holy roller Republican in their eyes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. MarkinLA says:
    @John Gruskos
    Against my own misgivings I supported Trump - maximum donations allowable by law, persuading all my family and friends to support Trump, putting my reputation on the line, volunteering in the phone banks, putting Trump signs in my front yard despite vandalism, going to rallies despite Antifa harassment (they apparently do their homework, recognized me and attacked me by name as I walked by).

    Why? Because I admired, respected and trusted Miller.

    I still admire and respect the man, but I no longer trust his judgement as much as I once did.

    I think he so much wanted to believe that a man with Trump's friends and family could be America's savior, he ignored the warning signs. I made the exact same mistake, but I expect my heroes to be smarter than myself.

    Rand Paul wouldn't have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.

    Rand Paul wouldn’t have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.

    As failed Republican candidates, neither would have done anything and it is pure speculation that Cruz would have done anything with DACA. DAPA was already illegal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Kevin C. says:
    @Frau Katze
    And here I thought we lived in democratic countries.

    But your answer is starting to match the facts more and more.

    And here I thought we lived in democratic countries.

    Democracy is always to a great degree a sham and myth, most “real” when the polity is small and the electorate is limited to the elite, as with the Athenian Democracy, where the franchised adult male citizens made up a tiny fraction of the population. And even then, much of the voters were merely under the sway of one or another demagogue (from the Ancient Greek δημαγωγός “leader of people”). Plus, what we mainly think of as “Athenian Democracy” lasted about a century; even by the broadest definitions, it doesn’t even clear two centuries.

    So yes, in our massive, diverse nation with universal franchise, democracy is a sham, with elites using the opinion-forming institutions (academia, the mass media megaphone) to manufacture the veneer of legitimacy for their autocratic power.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Ed says:
    @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    That’s the deal I envisioned in January. He even said it at a press gaggle the day DACA expiration was announced.

    The good news is no deal is actually in existence & the GOP is livid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. MarkinLA says:
    @Kevin C.
    Except, how are people physically in the US not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"? If you research the history of the Amendment, that clause refers specifically to those Indian tribes who were considered "sovereign nations", with their own territorial enclaves within the US borders. I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of "jurisdiction" in both domestic and international law, and is frankly arrant sophistry. The plain meaning of those words is indeed jus soli, and no amount of wishful thinking will change that, only another Amendment.

    Except, how are people physically in the US not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”?

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner. Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner.
     
    So, neither can women be drafted. And just because they're citizens of a foreign country doesn't mean they aren't "under our jurisdiction" if physically present. Can a cop arrest them, here in the US, for violations of US law? Then they're under our jurisdiction.

    Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.
     
    Again, under current legal understandings, reinforced by the various international laws and treaties intended to prevent "stateless persons", those are totally irrelevant with regards to being "under our jurisdiction". Are they physically present on US soil, not sovereign territory of another nation (as per embasies or certain "Native" lands)? Are they subject to our laws, rather than having sovereign immunity, diplomatic immunity, or extraterritorial privilege? Then they're "under our jurisdiction", no matter what other country they're a citizen of, and their children born in America are US citizens by the Constitution. This is well-established national and international jurisprudence, a matter of the very legal definition of "jurisdiction". An illegal immigrant is, unquestionably as a matter of law, "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, and so jus soli applies to all their anchor babies until the Fourteenth Amendment is amended, which is never going to happen.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Ed says:
    @John Gruskos
    Against my own misgivings I supported Trump - maximum donations allowable by law, persuading all my family and friends to support Trump, putting my reputation on the line, volunteering in the phone banks, putting Trump signs in my front yard despite vandalism, going to rallies despite Antifa harassment (they apparently do their homework, recognized me and attacked me by name as I walked by).

    Why? Because I admired, respected and trusted Miller.

    I still admire and respect the man, but I no longer trust his judgement as much as I once did.

    I think he so much wanted to believe that a man with Trump's friends and family could be America's savior, he ignored the warning signs. I made the exact same mistake, but I expect my heroes to be smarter than myself.

    Rand Paul wouldn't have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.

    Don’t lose hope. This is bigger than this fool Trump. Miller is working behind the scenes. It appears Sessions or his allies are leaking damaging info about Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    Miller is working behind the scenes.
     
    So what? The permanent, unelected government is more powerful than him, too.

    Don’t lose hope.
     
    There is no real hope left to lose.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. MarkinLA says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be rocking on the balls of his feet with his fists clenched tightly together as he slowly explains to President Trump why any form of legalization, or recognition of legal status for illegal alien infiltrators is amnesty. Jeff Sessions will tell President Trump that recognizing Obama's unlawful actions in regards to his executive amnesty for illegal aliens will be harmful to the rule of law in the United States.

    Hopefully, Jeff Sessions will start off telling President Trump that it is fine to have a heart and feel some sympathy for the illegal aliens but the rule of law is too important to be discarded just to satisfy some temporary feelings of compassion for the illegal aliens. Sessions must tell President Trump that the interests of current citizens must take precedence over the interests of illegal alien invaders. Sessions must tell President Trump that giving amnesty to the illegal aliens will set a horrible precedent that will come back to haunt the United States in the same manner that Reagan's disastrous amnesty of 1986 has caused so much trouble for the United States.

    Like that article about Trump bombing Syria after having been shown that there was no conclusive proof Syria was involved, Trump CANNOT ever admit he made a mistake. He has been braying about all these super-geniuses and their stellar achievements (graduating from America’s worst performing high schools). I doubt there is anyway he can allow himself to see reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Kevin C.

    birthright citizenship
     
    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that's especially difficult to accomplish. But then, it's not like it's really possible to get any of the other things on your list. And it's not just Trump; any other person in his position would prove equally powerless. Because the "Deep State" rules, and no mere president, or Congress, has the power to stop them, the absolute Lords of America.

    While may be correct, if you cut off the flow of illegals entering the country, the chances of large numbers of birthright citizens being born goes way, way down. Finding a way to stop Chinese women from landing here, and then squirreling themselves away in a hotel until the “blessed event” happens would be a component of that as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    Sure, halting the current inflow would help greatly (and removing the illegals present even more so). But first, that's never going to happen; our Ruling Elites will never allow it (and it's what they say, and not what the president or Congress says, that is enforced). And secondly, even if it did, it wouldn't be enough to stop the demographic trends already "baked-in" ensuring a white minority (and thus permanent Democrat majority) within a generation or so.

    The point, though, is that the inflow is not going to stop, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever we can do to change it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Opinionator
    I meant to hit "Agree" there! A very, very strong agree.

    Miller is already deserving of the highest American honor. He would be deserving of knighthood if we had such things.

    Let's not write Kushner off either. He doesn't compare to Miller--few people would--but his heart may be in the right place. He is in an unfamiliar and difficult situation.

    “Let’s not write Kushner off”

    Kushner is the #1 reason why Donald Trump, who ran as Pat Buchanan, is now governing as Hillary Clinton.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry134564
    According to whom? Maybe because I'm scientist, I like to see evidence for strong claims - and the stronger the claim, the stronger the evidence needs to be.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. MarkinLA says:

    The real solution to getting a DACA deal is to use the DACA roles and start deporting their parents with the threat that the Dreamers are next. Watch the Democrats start negotiating.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    The real solution to getting a DACA deal is to use the DACA roles and start deporting their parents with the threat that the Dreamers are next.
     
    Could never happen. Even if Trump ordered it, the "upper management" at DHS would do whatever they had to in order to ensure that the rank-and-file never actually carry out any such order. It doesn't matter what Trump, or any president orders or doesn't order, the unelected Federal bureaucracy will selectively obey or not obey as they will, and it's what they want that gets enforced on us peons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Daniel Horowitz
    @RMConservative
    5h

    The average immigrant brings in 3.45 family members but for Mexicans that number is 6.38

    conservativereview.com/articles/trump…

    @JessicaV_CIS

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry134564
    Family re-unification laws and birth right citizenship need to be eliminated, even as more of a priority than the issue of preventing illegal immigration, and removing illegal immigrants.

    In replacement of all this - there needs to be a merit based system, based on rational principles, that attempts to find the most talented and educated immigrants (those who can contribute the most to American science and the economy) from around the world.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    And as soon as a Dem or establishment Republican wins the White House — possibly 2020 and likely 2024 at latest — every one of those illegal aliens (“dreamers”) whom we let stay here as part of that deal, would be granted citizenship after all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jb
    If the establishment regains power, the DREAMers will probably end up citizens whether or not we pass a combined RAISE/DACA act now, so that argument is neither here nor there. But even a resurgent establishment is likely to have trouble rolling back popular RAISE Act provisions, so we still come out ahead.

    There is nothing on the table today that is more important the passing the RAISE Act!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Kevin C. says:
    @MarkinLA
    Except, how are people physically in the US not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”?

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner. Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner.

    So, neither can women be drafted. And just because they’re citizens of a foreign country doesn’t mean they aren’t “under our jurisdiction” if physically present. Can a cop arrest them, here in the US, for violations of US law? Then they’re under our jurisdiction.

    Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.

    Again, under current legal understandings, reinforced by the various international laws and treaties intended to prevent “stateless persons”, those are totally irrelevant with regards to being “under our jurisdiction”. Are they physically present on US soil, not sovereign territory of another nation (as per embasies or certain “Native” lands)? Are they subject to our laws, rather than having sovereign immunity, diplomatic immunity, or extraterritorial privilege? Then they’re “under our jurisdiction”, no matter what other country they’re a citizen of, and their children born in America are US citizens by the Constitution. This is well-established national and international jurisprudence, a matter of the very legal definition of “jurisdiction”. An illegal immigrant is, unquestionably as a matter of law, “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and so jus soli applies to all their anchor babies until the Fourteenth Amendment is amended, which is never going to happen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    So, neither can women be drafted.

    This is just plain dumb. Yes, the US Congress can pass a law that says women who are citizens of the US can be drafted just like men. The US Congress cannot pass a law that says any Mexican currently residing in the US can be drafted into the American Army and legally enforce it. We went to war with Britain over them pressing American citizens into Royal Navy ships.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Kevin C. says:
    @Ed
    Don't lose hope. This is bigger than this fool Trump. Miller is working behind the scenes. It appears Sessions or his allies are leaking damaging info about Trump.

    Miller is working behind the scenes.

    So what? The permanent, unelected government is more powerful than him, too.

    Don’t lose hope.

    There is no real hope left to lose.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @J.Ross
    Last night /pol/ was rendered alnost unusable by uncountable new threads, all starting at the same time, and thereafter illegally reposting existing material. And all of them said, "Trump caved, he betrayed you, it's all over." Many affected the imagined voice of legitimate /pol/ users. This crowd thinks we are violent teenaged virgins with Tourrette's Syndrome, and a willingness to turn on Trump on the slightest pretext, so it's pretty easy to see what's happening.
    Hey. Unz users. I know how to defeat Big Brother. It's easy.
    Did every voice in the Nepotism Network scream at you that Trump is dead? Then Trump is alive.
    Repeat this model with new values as often as is needed.

    Commenter Dump Trump is doing that in this thread

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Kevin C.’s last few dozen feverish comments on multiple threads have been a great parody of SNL’s Azrael Abyss or Sir Simon Milligan from Kids in the Hall.

    Gooood evening! Welcome to Pit of Ultimate Darkness. I am your host, Kevin C., with an important public service announcement:

    We are surrounded by ancient, unstoppable eeeevvvil. There is nothing anyone can do about it, muaahahahhahaha!

    Resistance is futile. Look into my eyes. Unstoppable eeevvil.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rADdKqPNdaM
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Kevin C. says:
    @JerseyJeffersonian
    While @Wilkey may be correct, if you cut off the flow of illegals entering the country, the chances of large numbers of birthright citizens being born goes way, way down. Finding a way to stop Chinese women from landing here, and then squirreling themselves away in a hotel until the "blessed event" happens would be a component of that as well.

    Sure, halting the current inflow would help greatly (and removing the illegals present even more so). But first, that’s never going to happen; our Ruling Elites will never allow it (and it’s what they say, and not what the president or Congress says, that is enforced). And secondly, even if it did, it wouldn’t be enough to stop the demographic trends already “baked-in” ensuring a white minority (and thus permanent Democrat majority) within a generation or so.

    The point, though, is that the inflow is not going to stop, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever we can do to change it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    The point, though, is that the inflow is not going to stop, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever we can do to change it.
     
    Kevin, you're discussing the birthright citizenship issue intelligently. Why do you then toss out this sort of blackpill nonsense.

    The US's situation is more difficult than Europe's where the flow across the Med is trivially easy to stop. But it is still relatively easy to stop.

    You build a wall to significantly cut back the flow significantly--once the probability of a successful trip gets very low people stop trying in any great number (see Berlin Wall)--and have mandatory E-verify to squelch the draw. Trump could--with a reasonably coherent speech on the matter--get both of those in exchange for DACA.

    Heck, even without that Trump as commander-in-chief could deploy the army to the border and stop the flow immediately.

    So your "absolutely nothing whatsoever" is contradicted by the obvious and straightforward path of simply "electing a President committed to doing it".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @guest
    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.

    Ah, but that's not 0%, so I guess he got it right.

    That being said, he's partly right because that's what Trump was best known for. However, I suggest one word for what got Trump to the White House:

    ...wait for it...

    Hillary.

    That's "what happened."

    How about this whopper:

    “Much of Trump’s immigration agenda doesn’t poll well: For instance, there isn’t broad support for building a border wall with Mexico, limiting legal immigration or ending DACA.”

    This is why I don’t bother with liberal media sources for my facts. It’s just bs built on lies, omissions and distortions, buttressed by a mountain of cash.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Kevin C. says:
    @MarkinLA
    The real solution to getting a DACA deal is to use the DACA roles and start deporting their parents with the threat that the Dreamers are next. Watch the Democrats start negotiating.

    The real solution to getting a DACA deal is to use the DACA roles and start deporting their parents with the threat that the Dreamers are next.

    Could never happen. Even if Trump ordered it, the “upper management” at DHS would do whatever they had to in order to ensure that the rank-and-file never actually carry out any such order. It doesn’t matter what Trump, or any president orders or doesn’t order, the unelected Federal bureaucracy will selectively obey or not obey as they will, and it’s what they want that gets enforced on us peons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @guest
    For some reason people are stuck on the odds part. Look, it wouldn't matter to me if Silver guessed wrong, because predicting elections isn't easy. But it's obvious that he gave Trump such bad odds because he trusted the polls. He couldn't tell the polls were wrong, and analyzing polls is really his only job. So what good is he? Why are we listening to him?

    Weathermen presumably have meteorological training and can guess better than the man on the street, even if they don't guess well. With the last election, if you gave the man in the street no information but that it was Candidate X versus Candidate Y, if he was smart he'd just give each 50/50 odds. That's better than Nate Silver's prediction. So why did he waste all that time thinking and number-crunching?

    Weather prognostication at least has some basis in science. Nate Silvering comes down to belief in Magic Polls.

    For some reason people are stuck on the odds part. Look, it wouldn’t matter to me if Silver guessed wrong, because predicting elections isn’t easy. But it’s obvious that he gave Trump such bad odds because he trusted the polls.

    How is 28% “such bad odds”? That’s basically Russian roulette with two rounds – not exactly once-in-a-lifetime odds for a US presidential election.

    Huffington Post was giving Trump, what, 2% odds? The Asian guy from Princeton – 1% odds? 1% means you wouldn’t expect it to happen even once from the founding of the country until present day. Those are bad odds!

    Silver trusted the polls because those same polls allowed him to predict 49 out of 50 states correctly in 2008 and 50 out of 50 states correctly in 2012. We now know that in 2016 many voters were lying to pollsters, even during the exit polls. Silver accounted for this by taking into account the conspicuous number of undecideds, which pushed the odds closer to 50/50. HuffPo apparently made no such adjustment, hence their enormous overconfidence in the losing candidate.

    If Silver had taken into account – for example – stories of people being beaten half to death for publicly expressing their support for Trump (stories that surely helped Greg Cochran make his prediction on the morning of the election), he might have given Trump over 50% odds, but he also would have been engaging in something like punditry – something he had been excoriated for doing during the Republican primaries.

    It’s good to have someone out there trying to make predictions based solely on publicly available polling data, someone who doesn’t completely suck at it. The cylinder was spun, the trigger was pulled, the gun went off. Silver told us there were two rounds in the gun; virtually everyone else said the gun wasn’t loaded. Moral victory for Silver.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @J.Ross
    Last night /pol/ was rendered alnost unusable by uncountable new threads, all starting at the same time, and thereafter illegally reposting existing material. And all of them said, "Trump caved, he betrayed you, it's all over." Many affected the imagined voice of legitimate /pol/ users. This crowd thinks we are violent teenaged virgins with Tourrette's Syndrome, and a willingness to turn on Trump on the slightest pretext, so it's pretty easy to see what's happening.
    Hey. Unz users. I know how to defeat Big Brother. It's easy.
    Did every voice in the Nepotism Network scream at you that Trump is dead? Then Trump is alive.
    Repeat this model with new values as often as is needed.

    I don’t care about slash pol slash. It sounds like Donald Trump is a worthless fool, but I always keep my hopes up. I don’t see the commenters you are talking about on here, as most of us think for ourselves.

    Sometimes you hear something a lot because the people are right! (Not on TV, I mean – there it’s 24/7 BS)

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    I'm sure you are right. Twenty posts with the same wording appeared at the same time because of all the individuality going around.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. res says:
    @AnotherDad

    Why are we listening to this person? He gave Trump a 28% chance.
     
    That was quite a reasonable estimate for Trump in the closing stages of this election.

    My personal math--not that anyone cares--had Trump winning 260 or 264 and needing Wisconsin to win. I would have given Trump's odds in that same 1/3 ballpark. Trump got Wisconsin ... *and* Pennsylvania and Michigan. Impressive. But still a razor thin win by < 1% in three states that could have slipped out with the most minor fluctuation in perception of either candidate.

    The plain fact was this was a very difficult election to call. Because both candidates had high negatives and because the press had picked out one candidate--Trump--as their bete noire, beyond the pale, which meant there was an even greater chance of Trump supporters ducking/lying-to pollsters and also a counter-reaction effect to stick it to the highly disliked alternative.

    The key point here is that Silver/538, kept saying Trump's got a decent shot to win this thing, even while huge numbers of pollsters and pontificators were blabbing how it was all over, Hillary was a mortal lock, blah, blah, blah.

    What most certainly did not happen was some sort of Trumpian landslide that Silver/538 and everyone else missed. I think that was possible post-Obama--especially against the crappy and unpleasant Hillary--but would have required a nationalist candidate as energetic, but far more articulate and disciplined than Trump.

    Agreed, but two additional thoughts. One in Nate’s favor, one not.

    538 boosted their estimate right before the election after being negative for an extended period. Here it was 15/17% two weeks before the election: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-why-our-model-is-more-bullish-than-others-on-trump/

    538 was less negative on Trump than most of the MSM though. For example, the Upshot at 15% right before the election (includes a plot of five months worth of their predictions): https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?mcubz=0
    And for possibly the worst see Ryan Grim’s 2% chance for Trump prediction: https://www.mediaite.com/online/nate-silver-goes-to-war-with-huffpost-writer-after-highly-critical-column/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Sarah Toga
    boy am I confused by the Chucky-Nancy-Donald-DACA talk.

    My "dream" is that Donald plays "Lucy" to Chucky's "Charlie Brown" and yanks the football out from under him.

    The Donald could say, "The American people made their voices clear - no amnesty - enforcement only - sorry Chucky!" - with a big Trump grin.
    I hope.

    Donald - call Ann Coulter! Please!

    I hope you are right too, Sarah Toga (is that as in Cherokee 6, btw?), but the experienced side of me doubts it very much.

    To explain, Lucy represents any of the elected politicians, and this time it represents President Trump. Charlie Brown represents the voters. The football could be a secure border, end of affirmative action, balancing of the budget (haha, I just tossed in that last 40 year-old football for “kicks” – it may not have air in it), whatever the voters want.

    Charles Schultz, the writer, did not really state that Lucy was a bipolar hermaphrodite, with some parts that represent the Red, or stupid, wing and some that represent the Blue, or evil, wing of herself – “The PARTY”. When Lucy performs self-abuse – this is known as bi-partisanship. (No, you won’t see that on prime time – maybe CSPAN).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Affirmative Action has been banned in several states, but the academic bureaucracy just ignores it, and for the most part does so with impunity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. JohnnyD says:

    Trump is terrible at making deals. He’s basically rewarding all the people who hate him and think he’s a Nazi, while spitting in the faces of his loyal supporters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  134. @27 year old
    Commenter Dump Trump is doing that in this thread

    Kevin C.’s last few dozen feverish comments on multiple threads have been a great parody of SNL’s Azrael Abyss or Sir Simon Milligan from Kids in the Hall.

    Gooood evening! Welcome to Pit of Ultimate Darkness. I am your host, Kevin C., with an important public service announcement:

    We are surrounded by ancient, unstoppable eeeevvvil. There is nothing anyone can do about it, muaahahahhahaha!

    Resistance is futile. Look into my eyes. Unstoppable eeevvil.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't care about slash pol slash. It sounds like Donald Trump is a worthless fool, but I always keep my hopes up. I don't see the commenters you are talking about on here, as most of us think for ourselves.

    Sometimes you hear something a lot because the people are right! (Not on TV, I mean - there it's 24/7 BS)

    I’m sure you are right. Twenty posts with the same wording appeared at the same time because of all the individuality going around.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    20 comments, huh? Under this here Steve Sailer post, you say? Just give me 10 comment numbers, or even 5, that are very close to the same wording to prove your point. I would have noticed because I read them all. I'm pretty sure you don't, Mr. Ross.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @John Gruskos
    "Let’s not write Kushner off"

    Kushner is the #1 reason why Donald Trump, who ran as Pat Buchanan, is now governing as Hillary Clinton.

    According to whom? Maybe because I’m scientist, I like to see evidence for strong claims – and the stronger the claim, the stronger the evidence needs to be.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @KM32
    Sorry, but Mexican food is delicious, and most people love it.

    I'm trying to look on the bright side here. The world hardly needs another Hispanic nation, but if we're lucky, the Hispanic tidal wave will save us from Islam and/or Africa. Civilization can rebound in 5-15 generations.

    We are all aware that Mexico is somewhat of a failed country, much like India, Russia, Brazil etc. But I need to read more negative data on the actual impact of the specific Mexican immigrants we are getting (such as their unemployment rates), before making a judgement.

    There are some immigrants from not very successful countries, who nonetheless can add to the country a lot in terms of skills, patriotic feeling and education. The country doesn’t always tell you everything about the immigrants who come from that country – if you got the intellectual elite of Mexico (I’m not saying that’s happening at all!), then I would be hard pressed to see it as bad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    if you got the intellectual elite of Mexico (I’m not saying that’s happening at all!), then I would be hard pressed to see it as bad.

    It would be bad for at least some Americans if the Mexican elite replaced the native American elite.
    , @MarkinLA
    Look at California to see what kind of immigrants from Mexico we are getting. Everywhere there has been a large influx of Mexicans, the school results have gone down.

    Why would the Mexican elite want to come here to live? They can visit any time they want and they run the place down there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. jb says:
    @RadicalCenter
    And as soon as a Dem or establishment Republican wins the White House -- possibly 2020 and likely 2024 at latest -- every one of those illegal aliens ("dreamers") whom we let stay here as part of that deal, would be granted citizenship after all.

    If the establishment regains power, the DREAMers will probably end up citizens whether or not we pass a combined RAISE/DACA act now, so that argument is neither here nor there. But even a resurgent establishment is likely to have trouble rolling back popular RAISE Act provisions, so we still come out ahead.

    There is nothing on the table today that is more important the passing the RAISE Act!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    RAISE Act barely reduces legal immigration levels.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Anonymous
    Daniel Horowitz
    @RMConservative
    5h


    The average immigrant brings in 3.45 family members but for Mexicans that number is 6.38

    conservativereview.com/articles/trump…

    @JessicaV_CIS

    Family re-unification laws and birth right citizenship need to be eliminated, even as more of a priority than the issue of preventing illegal immigration, and removing illegal immigrants.

    In replacement of all this – there needs to be a merit based system, based on rational principles, that attempts to find the most talented and educated immigrants (those who can contribute the most to American science and the economy) from around the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    that attempts to find the most talented and educated immigrants (those who can contribute the most to American science and the economy) from around the world.

    We don't need 'em. Other countries do.
    , @MarkinLA
    There are already visas for exceptionally talented people the O-1 visa.

    http://www.visapro.com/O1-Visa/O1-Visa.asp?_kk=o%201%20visa&_kt=cd61638f-d994-4304-b0a5-7ef60aa9f155

    The problem is the basket of visas for mediocrities like H-1B and H-2.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @John Gruskos
    Stephen Miller is the man most responsible for convincing American nationalist conservatives to vote for Trump, not Cruz or Paul, in the primaries, and to vote for Trump, not Darrel Castle, in the general election.

    Lesson learned.

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like Stephen Miller any more than we can trust the sincerity of men like Jared Kushner's father-in-law.

    We cannot trust the good judgement of men like….

    John Gruskos

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @John Gruskos
    Against my own misgivings I supported Trump - maximum donations allowable by law, persuading all my family and friends to support Trump, putting my reputation on the line, volunteering in the phone banks, putting Trump signs in my front yard despite vandalism, going to rallies despite Antifa harassment (they apparently do their homework, recognized me and attacked me by name as I walked by).

    Why? Because I admired, respected and trusted Miller.

    I still admire and respect the man, but I no longer trust his judgement as much as I once did.

    I think he so much wanted to believe that a man with Trump's friends and family could be America's savior, he ignored the warning signs. I made the exact same mistake, but I expect my heroes to be smarter than myself.

    Rand Paul wouldn't have bombed Syria, supported the Saudi war in Yemen, or signed new sanctions against Russia, Syria, Iran etc.

    Ted Cruz would have revoked DAPA and DACA on his first day, without any quid pro quo.

    Neither Rand Paul nor Ted Cruz would have made immigration the central issue of the campaign. Whatever happens from here forward, Trump should be lauded for putting immigration front and center on the table of American political dialogue.

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Dump Trump

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors...
     
    Still holding out for that 18D chess scenario I see. I'm afraid you've given the man too much credit. He's a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved. Now he's hated by all. The Dems will never love him, and his base hate him even more, save for a few die-hard fan boys/girls from the Appalachian.

    Give it up. You can tell from the way he talks the man is about an inch deep, with nothing but hot air and a bad comb-over between the ears. He is no thinker or strategic playmaker. He just got outplayed by a cunning Jew. He blusters, lies and then caves completely. He's as good as dead to me.

    He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved.

    Thank you for providing the quintessential example of projection. Setting aside your glaring stupidity we can all admire your combination of a lack of self awareness with an inability to see more than one millisecond into the future.

    Your cautionary example is noted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dump Trump
    I'm afraid it is you who is too stupid to see the long term implication of this shit deal. In 1986 Reagan gave amnesty to 2.6m, 30 years later we have 30m more illegals. This shit deal gave 3.3m-5m blanket amnesty and they are free to gain citizenship in 5 years, not to mention the many more relatives they will begin to sponsor and bring in. The GOP won the last election by 84,000 votes, they might as well kiss the WH and Congress goodbye when these DACA people become citizens. They won't be thanking Trump and the GOP, they'll be thanking Chuck Schumer and Dems as their savior. He could've used DACA as a bargaining chip to secure the RAISE act and the wall, instead he just gave it away. Utter stupidity and only the equally stupid will continue to defend him.

    Also, your man just signed the anti-hate speech resolution which is essentially a direct assault on the First Amendment. But keep defending him moron.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. TangoMan says:
    @Kevin C.
    Except, how are people physically in the US not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"? If you research the history of the Amendment, that clause refers specifically to those Indian tribes who were considered "sovereign nations", with their own territorial enclaves within the US borders. I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of "jurisdiction" in both domestic and international law, and is frankly arrant sophistry. The plain meaning of those words is indeed jus soli, and no amount of wishful thinking will change that, only another Amendment.

    I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow “not subject to the jurisdiction” of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of “jurisdiction” in both domestic and international law,

    There’s a lot of confusion on this point and that clause. Does anything change if you remove that clause? Nothing changes. The US had enforcement authority against people in the US illegally right from the start, so the clause is not needed with respect to enforcement of laws and citizenship. The confusion arises from standard meaning. It’s historical meaning that is the key point here and the historical meaning of jurisdiction is people who owe allegiance to another sovereign. If you didn’t qualify as a citizen of America then you were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. You could still be arrested and deported by US official even if you weren’t subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Of course something changes if you remove the clause. The above poster mentioned Red Indians. They're supposed to have sovereign land within U.S. territory. There're also diplomats, who have qualified immunity. Invading armies, who are outlaws in the old sense.

    The mono-allegiance concept may have been in people's minds, but it's not in the language. It's a figment of your imagination, legally.

    "You could still be arrested and deported by US official even if you're weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US"

    So?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. jb says:
    @Bill Jones
    "They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. "

    Nonsensense. Where is the moral argument that children get to keep what their parents stole.

    No, it’s isn’t nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don’t punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can’t repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can’t go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That’s just the way the world works — our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors’ prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here’s the thing: if you really can’t understand that it’s immoral to deport someone to a country they don’t remember, where they don’t even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that’s what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    They can relocate with same ease with which American workers are expected to relocate when their jobs are outsourced or when they are replaced in the towns and cities they live in by immigrants.
    , @Intelligent Dasein

    Leaving that aside though, here’s the thing: if you really can’t understand that it’s immoral to deport someone to a country they don’t remember, where they don’t even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that’s what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!
     
    You have it completely backwards. These people are the lawful subjects of the countries from whence they came, and it is actually unjust and immoral not to send them back where they belong. Angela Merkel thinks that, because her country is facing demographic doom and needs low-wage workers, it's perfectly okay for her to simply steal the population of Syria. Some may call this compassion and others, taking a more cynical view, try to justify it on economic grounds, but let's just call it what it is: One of the biggest slave raids in history. The United States is doing the same thing to Mexico and Central America. Our Latin neighbors permit and encourage this sort of thing for the time being, because their dispersed populations in the US send back huge amounts of remittances and they are more valuable to their country here than they are back home. But if those remittances were to dry up, and if Mexico itself were suffering a shortage of workers, the cry would be exactly the opposite. Then you would hear the Hispanderers screaming, "You brought us to your steenking country to work as slaves in your fields! Send us home! Let my people go!"

    It is actually not difficult to change the incentive structure such that the Latins would self-deport. All we need to do is start enforcing workplace compliance and deny banking and wire transfer access to illegals. If we stop paying them, they won't come here. I don't know if our rancid political class will ever do this willingly, but the next Great Devaluation may be so awful that it will change the calculus nonetheless.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can’t repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can’t go after you.
     
    That's not a really good example, JB, because a college education can't be taken back. If you are driving a stolen car that your parents handed down to you, and the owner finds out, he has every right to take it back - also not the best example because of depreciation.

    What if you quit paying your property taxes on your house, JB, cause you really can't support all the illegals that have filled up the elementary schools? Maybe you live in NY or CA or TX with HIGH taxes. Do you think they will evict you but leave your kids there? I really doubt it.

    What do you mean "don't speak the language"? English? There are huge areas around the country in which immigrants, illegal or not, just don't need to learn English anymore. Are you talking about the 4 or 5 valedictorians in that crowd of 1/2 million to 1 million? He can be a valedictorian in Mexico just as easily!

    You either enforce the law against illegal entry or you don't. You're really being a sap here. Commenters on unz and writers on VDare (immigration policy and history is their bread and butter) have told you that it's no 1/2 million people either. By the time family members come and others get in on the AMNESTY that are not even eligible, it'll be up to 3 million or so. Just a drop in the bucket right, the population of one of the smaller states?!

    People like you are the problem, along with a wishy-washy can't-do president.
    , @MarkinLA
    Generally, they speak the language of their parents at home. The parents and the kid can be deported at the same time which will make the transition easier. You have just bought into the silly "feelings" argument.

    Enforcing the law is tough and some people like the kids of the bank robber or drug dealer when the dad goes off to prison get hurt. But, hey, that's life.
    , @guest
    "Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever?"

    Yes, way, way back in ancient times, before the Holy DACA was brought down the mountain by Moses. People back then apparently weren't born knowing how evil they were. Impossibly evil, I might say, because how did America even exist without DACA? Such an idea is scarcely credible. It's a mystery scholars agree they may never understand.

    You may be merely weighing down the scales of argument with your personal version of "I can't even," but in case you don't know it you sound exactly like a progressive. They can't comprehend the idea that anyone could possibly be against gay marriage, for instance,without being Literally Hitler. Meanwhile, all of human history until a few Current Years ago somehow didn't find gay marriage necessary. The issue didn't even occur to most of them.

    If Trump gives in on DACA, and it becomes our new permanent policy, no doubt the puppetmasters will come up with new moral arguments you find unanswerable, and which shall require our unilateral surrender in order for us not to be pariahs.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Maj. Kong says:
    @Opinionator
    Richard Spencer has effectively destroyed the Trump
    agenda.

    McAuliffe appears to have intended for violence to happen in Charlottesville, and the FBI was almost certainly among both sides. (We came very close to a shooting war)

    The Charlottesville riot led to the coup which we are now seeing the final stages of. The mass resignations by the CEOs was a demand (successful) to remove Bannon and Gorka, and let the neocons back in charge.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    If it actually did lead to a coup, how pathetically weak is our side? I mean, not long before Charlottesville a lefty shot up congressional Republicans at a softball game. Does anyone remember that? Last year BLM was rioting besieging police forces in major cities. Which way do they lean politically, again?

    One person being hit by a car for Lord knows what reason, exactly, is the last straw? Now we've gone too far, and it's time for which side to give up? The one that got bamboozled into a fight because after being denied their legal right to demonstrate?

    I repeat just how weak are we? The Nazi playactors screwed us, and not for the first time. But PR disasters only last so long. Plus, they have the effect of giving the left enough slack to hang themselves. Right now, fortunately or un-, they're running wild. So much the worse for them.

    There's going to be so much bad press from here to the Promised Land. We may long for the reputations of Joe McCarthy or Benedict Arnold.

    If our current leaders don't know that, and CEO virtue-signalling has any real political effect, and we go along with it, well. We didn't deserve to play this game.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Maj. Kong says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I hope you are right too, Sarah Toga (is that as in Cherokee 6, btw?), but the experienced side of me doubts it very much.

    To explain, Lucy represents any of the elected politicians, and this time it represents President Trump. Charlie Brown represents the voters. The football could be a secure border, end of affirmative action, balancing of the budget (haha, I just tossed in that last 40 year-old football for "kicks" - it may not have air in it), whatever the voters want.

    Charles Schultz, the writer, did not really state that Lucy was a bipolar hermaphrodite, with some parts that represent the Red, or stupid, wing and some that represent the Blue, or evil, wing of herself - "The PARTY". When Lucy performs self-abuse - this is known as bi-partisanship. (No, you won't see that on prime time - maybe CSPAN).

    Affirmative Action has been banned in several states, but the academic bureaucracy just ignores it, and for the most part does so with impunity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. bartok says:
    @Kevin C.

    birthright citizenship
     
    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of, so that's especially difficult to accomplish. But then, it's not like it's really possible to get any of the other things on your list. And it's not just Trump; any other person in his position would prove equally powerless. Because the "Deep State" rules, and no mere president, or Congress, has the power to stop them, the absolute Lords of America.

    This would require a Constitutional amendment to get rid of

    No way. The State Dept. and SSA simply must explain to the states that “under the jurisdiction of” must be proven before SS cards and passports are issued. Illegal aliens are not “under the jurisdiction of” the US government.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. guest says:
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Regarding gay marriage, that was more often than not a legal issue. Gays didn’t have to be too passionate to convince judges as compared to regular folks.
     
    Not really.

    I was early in my legal career but even I can recall that Constitutional arguments for Homosexual Marriage were laughed at out of hand by even liberal law professors. Like, "novel, but not compelling."

    Specifically, I can recall watching oral argument before the New York Court of Appeals (New York's highest court) rejecting those arguments as well as arguments under the New York Constitution.

    They just turned the propaganda up to 11.

    In any case, though judges are elected or appointed by elected officials, they’re not normally considered political figures. They make political decisions, but they’re not persuaded like the people are persuaded to vote a referendum up or down, for instance. Nor how they’re convinced to elect representatives to do things on their behalf.

    It’s easy for me to see how judges were swayed. The went the New Civil Rights route. Which is a well-worn route.

    Gays didn’t have as much success going the popular way. More the what will they say at cocktail parties/what will they teach about my decision at Harvard/Yale/Columbia law? That’s my point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Jack Hanson
    No the usual suspects will be taking a wait and see approach versus hysterically overreacting and eeyoring on about betrayal because Bannon's Blog makes YET ANOTHER claim that Trump is passing amnesty.

    Nobody cares about what Breitbart says, what Coulter says or what Chuck and Nancy say. We DO care about about what Trump says and this morning Trump said explicitly, amnesty and no wall. His spokespeople all confirmed the same.

    I know that Chuck and Nancy are lying about the agreement they claim to have, but I also know from Trump’s own words that he wants to sell us out on this one. By all accounts, he wanted to pass amnesty after getting elected and had to be talked out of it by Grassley and Cornyn, that is how weak Trump’s instincts are on immigration.

    The guy has no ideological center and is just a liability to us at this point. We need to get rid of him as soon as possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Just replying to this a few weeks later after the wall prototypes are being built and Trump talked the NFL into a dynamite supposity.

    No amnesty tho. Maybe put down the blackpill.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. guest says:
    @TangoMan
    I get trying to claim that illegals are somehow “not subject to the jurisdiction” of the US, but that runs counter to the standard meaning of “jurisdiction” in both domestic and international law,

    There's a lot of confusion on this point and that clause. Does anything change if you remove that clause? Nothing changes. The US had enforcement authority against people in the US illegally right from the start, so the clause is not needed with respect to enforcement of laws and citizenship. The confusion arises from standard meaning. It's historical meaning that is the key point here and the historical meaning of jurisdiction is people who owe allegiance to another sovereign. If you didn't qualify as a citizen of America then you were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. You could still be arrested and deported by US official even if you weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

    Of course something changes if you remove the clause. The above poster mentioned Red Indians. They’re supposed to have sovereign land within U.S. territory. There’re also diplomats, who have qualified immunity. Invading armies, who are outlaws in the old sense.

    The mono-allegiance concept may have been in people’s minds, but it’s not in the language. It’s a figment of your imagination, legally.

    “You could still be arrested and deported by US official even if you’re weren’t subject to the jurisdiction of the US”

    So?

    Read More
    • Replies: @TangoMan
    Nothing changes with respect to anchor babies. Subject to jurisdiction is there for the reasons you point out, diplomats and Indians were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, they were subject of other sovereign nations.

    People are arguing that because illegals today are subject to arrest that their children qualify for anchor baby status but those illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of America, they are citizens of another land, therefore their children are not US citizens.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. guest says:
    @Maj. Kong
    McAuliffe appears to have intended for violence to happen in Charlottesville, and the FBI was almost certainly among both sides. (We came very close to a shooting war)

    The Charlottesville riot led to the coup which we are now seeing the final stages of. The mass resignations by the CEOs was a demand (successful) to remove Bannon and Gorka, and let the neocons back in charge.

    If it actually did lead to a coup, how pathetically weak is our side? I mean, not long before Charlottesville a lefty shot up congressional Republicans at a softball game. Does anyone remember that? Last year BLM was rioting besieging police forces in major cities. Which way do they lean politically, again?

    One person being hit by a car for Lord knows what reason, exactly, is the last straw? Now we’ve gone too far, and it’s time for which side to give up? The one that got bamboozled into a fight because after being denied their legal right to demonstrate?

    I repeat just how weak are we? The Nazi playactors screwed us, and not for the first time. But PR disasters only last so long. Plus, they have the effect of giving the left enough slack to hang themselves. Right now, fortunately or un-, they’re running wild. So much the worse for them.

    There’s going to be so much bad press from here to the Promised Land. We may long for the reputations of Joe McCarthy or Benedict Arnold.

    If our current leaders don’t know that, and CEO virtue-signalling has any real political effect, and we go along with it, well. We didn’t deserve to play this game.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Our side has almost zero cultural power. As Breitbart said, "politics flows downstream from culture"

    Unless you can get an armed mob to burn Yale University to the ground (almost happened in 1841), they are protected by their large endowments, well-connected alumni and the transnational billionaires that fund most of the CultMarx establishment.

    The average normie saw a scary crowd of armed Nazis, saying that "Jews will not replace us" (I always thought it was "you"). And we had one instance of one rioter firing a warning shot at another with an improvised flamethrower. That could have easily led to a shooting war. Both sides and the police/NG were armed with rifles.

    Trump doesn't pay much attention to the details, and he didn't do the right thing by federalizing the VA guard and condemning McAuliffe. Instead, somehow the media spun it that he was praising the Nazis. The left's base views antifa-BLM with awe, and has been fed a narrative that right-wing violence has been ignored by an Islamophobic media. A perfect storm.

    *Breitbart has faced significant declines in its ad revenue thanks to leftist pressure. The Mercers don't have the kind of wealth that a Zuck, Gates, Buffett or Soros does.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. @Dmitry134564
    We are all aware that Mexico is somewhat of a failed country, much like India, Russia, Brazil etc. But I need to read more negative data on the actual impact of the specific Mexican immigrants we are getting (such as their unemployment rates), before making a judgement.

    There are some immigrants from not very successful countries, who nonetheless can add to the country a lot in terms of skills, patriotic feeling and education. The country doesn't always tell you everything about the immigrants who come from that country - if you got the intellectual elite of Mexico (I'm not saying that's happening at all!), then I would be hard pressed to see it as bad.

    if you got the intellectual elite of Mexico (I’m not saying that’s happening at all!), then I would be hard pressed to see it as bad.

    It would be bad for at least some Americans if the Mexican elite replaced the native American elite.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @jb
    If the establishment regains power, the DREAMers will probably end up citizens whether or not we pass a combined RAISE/DACA act now, so that argument is neither here nor there. But even a resurgent establishment is likely to have trouble rolling back popular RAISE Act provisions, so we still come out ahead.

    There is nothing on the table today that is more important the passing the RAISE Act!

    RAISE Act barely reduces legal immigration levels.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. guest says:
    @KM32
    Sorry, but Mexican food is delicious, and most people love it.

    I'm trying to look on the bright side here. The world hardly needs another Hispanic nation, but if we're lucky, the Hispanic tidal wave will save us from Islam and/or Africa. Civilization can rebound in 5-15 generations.

    There can be some kind of Western Civilization with a largely Latin American U.S. Muslims would simply destroy it. Latins are Christian, at least, and have much European blood.

    But it won’t be historical U.S. civilization. Which is based largely on English civilization. It won’t be Northwest European civilization, which is somewhat assimilable to English-cum-American civilization.

    The country simply wouldn’t be the U.S. anymore. It would be the Zombie U.S. at best.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @jb
    No, it's isn't nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don't punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can't repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can't go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That's just the way the world works -- our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors' prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here's the thing: if you really can't understand that it's immoral to deport someone to a country they don't remember, where they don't even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that's what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    They can relocate with same ease with which American workers are expected to relocate when their jobs are outsourced or when they are replaced in the towns and cities they live in by immigrants.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. guest says:
    @AnotherDad

    I’m not sure you know how presidential elections work. Trump could’ve bested 16 billion Republicans. If he doesn’t beat out his general election opponent(s), he doesn’t get to the White House.
     
    Perhaps you didn't read through the snippet provided and see the claim 538 is actually making.
    It is titled:

    "Trump's hardline immigration stance got him to the White House"
     
    "got him to the White House" not "beat Hillary".

    Getting to the White House is a process, which for Trump included getting media attention and winning the Republican nomination. Their wrap paragraph makes this clear:

    In 2016, moreover, immigration may have been the issue most responsible for Trump’s winning the Republican nomination. In every state with a caucus or primary exit poll, he did best among voters who said immigration was their top issue.
     
    I don't disagree with you that the #1 reason Trump beat Hillary is ... "Hillary". Joe Biden would probably have beaten Trump. Probably a good number of other bland Democrats without such high negatives. But immigration is clearly the #1 issue for why this guy named Trump is there instead of someone else.

    “Getting to the White House is a process”

    Yeah, the most important part of the process being the general election. Including when the opponent is a walkover, which Hillary wasn’t. But she was just bad enough for him to win.

    This article would be better served with a headline about how immigration got Trump to the Republican nomination. But it didn’t, probably because this way it gets more clicks.

    Well, I’m taking the headline at its word. As it deserves

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @Dmitry134564
    Family re-unification laws and birth right citizenship need to be eliminated, even as more of a priority than the issue of preventing illegal immigration, and removing illegal immigrants.

    In replacement of all this - there needs to be a merit based system, based on rational principles, that attempts to find the most talented and educated immigrants (those who can contribute the most to American science and the economy) from around the world.

    that attempts to find the most talented and educated immigrants (those who can contribute the most to American science and the economy) from around the world.

    We don’t need ‘em. Other countries do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Svigor says:

    So, neither can women be drafted.

    Irrelevant; they’re subject to the jurisdiction of the US, and thus could be drafted, if the law were changed. Foreign citizens, while subject to arrest, are not subject to the draft.

    Can a cop arrest them, here in the US, for violations of US law? Then they’re under our jurisdiction.

    FBI can arrest people in foreign countries. As can our military.

    TangoMan’s interpretation makes sense; otherwise, the clause is superfluous.

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner. Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.

    While may be correct, if you cut off the flow of illegals entering the country, the chances of large numbers of birthright citizens being born goes way, way down. Finding a way to stop Chinese women from landing here, and then squirreling themselves away in a hotel until the “blessed event” happens would be a component of that as well.

    Any law that isn’t protected against such gaming and abuse is no law at all. “No, you evaded the law, your child is fruit from that poison tree, the end.”

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

    If you interpret the clause as meaning “within US authorities’ grasp,” then the Amendment means people born here who aren’t on US soil are not citizens. And people who leave US soil are no longer citizens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  159. TangoMan says:
    @guest
    Of course something changes if you remove the clause. The above poster mentioned Red Indians. They're supposed to have sovereign land within U.S. territory. There're also diplomats, who have qualified immunity. Invading armies, who are outlaws in the old sense.

    The mono-allegiance concept may have been in people's minds, but it's not in the language. It's a figment of your imagination, legally.

    "You could still be arrested and deported by US official even if you're weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US"

    So?

    Nothing changes with respect to anchor babies. Subject to jurisdiction is there for the reasons you point out, diplomats and Indians were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, they were subject of other sovereign nations.

    People are arguing that because illegals today are subject to arrest that their children qualify for anchor baby status but those illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of America, they are citizens of another land, therefore their children are not US citizens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I doubt opposing Mexican immigration is what got Trump elected.
     
    Wrong. Trump’s candidacy announcement on June 16, 2015 is what made his
    presidency possible:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_q61B-DyPk&feature=youtu.be&t=7m58s

    His lines on Mexican and other Latin American invaders was the big news that week, resulting in gasps of horror and derision from the MSM. Millions of MAGA voters were suddenly minted that week, but the pollsters and RINOs and most of the left either didn’t (or didn’t want to) recognize it.

    Three days later on Bill Maher’s show, Ann Coulter matter-of-factly called it correctly:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-2uSG1xUEg

    Regarding the announcement video I linked to: It’s from Trump’s official YouTube campaign channel “Donald J. Trump for President.” It racked up 2,778,000 views and is now “unlisted” by the channel admin, the only searchable videos being stuff from after the inauguration.

    Was it Trump’s prejudice against Mexicans that appealed to voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania or was it his defiance against politically correct norms, the same ones that are actively encouraging black lives matters and doing damage to Midwestern cities?

    I doubt people in economically depressed parts of the Midwest see many Mexicans and would not spend much time thinking about them.

    So it was not Trump’s hardline against Mexican immigration that carried his campaign. It was his anti-political correctness embodied in his message denigrating Mexicans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Trump has never denigrated Mexicans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Maj. Kong says:
    @guest
    If it actually did lead to a coup, how pathetically weak is our side? I mean, not long before Charlottesville a lefty shot up congressional Republicans at a softball game. Does anyone remember that? Last year BLM was rioting besieging police forces in major cities. Which way do they lean politically, again?

    One person being hit by a car for Lord knows what reason, exactly, is the last straw? Now we've gone too far, and it's time for which side to give up? The one that got bamboozled into a fight because after being denied their legal right to demonstrate?

    I repeat just how weak are we? The Nazi playactors screwed us, and not for the first time. But PR disasters only last so long. Plus, they have the effect of giving the left enough slack to hang themselves. Right now, fortunately or un-, they're running wild. So much the worse for them.

    There's going to be so much bad press from here to the Promised Land. We may long for the reputations of Joe McCarthy or Benedict Arnold.

    If our current leaders don't know that, and CEO virtue-signalling has any real political effect, and we go along with it, well. We didn't deserve to play this game.

    Our side has almost zero cultural power. As Breitbart said, “politics flows downstream from culture”

    Unless you can get an armed mob to burn Yale University to the ground (almost happened in 1841), they are protected by their large endowments, well-connected alumni and the transnational billionaires that fund most of the CultMarx establishment.

    The average normie saw a scary crowd of armed Nazis, saying that “Jews will not replace us” (I always thought it was “you”). And we had one instance of one rioter firing a warning shot at another with an improvised flamethrower. That could have easily led to a shooting war. Both sides and the police/NG were armed with rifles.

    Trump doesn’t pay much attention to the details, and he didn’t do the right thing by federalizing the VA guard and condemning McAuliffe. Instead, somehow the media spun it that he was praising the Nazis. The left’s base views antifa-BLM with awe, and has been fed a narrative that right-wing violence has been ignored by an Islamophobic media. A perfect storm.

    *Breitbart has faced significant declines in its ad revenue thanks to leftist pressure. The Mercers don’t have the kind of wealth that a Zuck, Gates, Buffett or Soros does.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    I'd also suggest that the Mueller probe may have found some new financial shenanigans surrounding the Kushner family, and that is being used as leverage to force Trump into screwing his base. I put the odds of coup at 80%, with a 20% chance that Trump has simply given up and is phoning it in. I have no confidence at all in the Cruzbot view that Trump was "always a Democrat" and planned this all along.

    I don't think we have much of a shot in federal politics anymore. Best to focus on personal lifestyle changes (relocation, boycotts, self-improvement), and try to build up from the local level.
    , @guest
    I know all that, but what's the big deal? It's not a reason to give in. They'll embarrass themselves soon enough, because they can't help it.

    If our side can't weather Nazi storms, there's no point. If the Hitler card is unbeatable, why are we even playing?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Maj. Kong says:
    @Maj. Kong
    Our side has almost zero cultural power. As Breitbart said, "politics flows downstream from culture"

    Unless you can get an armed mob to burn Yale University to the ground (almost happened in 1841), they are protected by their large endowments, well-connected alumni and the transnational billionaires that fund most of the CultMarx establishment.

    The average normie saw a scary crowd of armed Nazis, saying that "Jews will not replace us" (I always thought it was "you"). And we had one instance of one rioter firing a warning shot at another with an improvised flamethrower. That could have easily led to a shooting war. Both sides and the police/NG were armed with rifles.

    Trump doesn't pay much attention to the details, and he didn't do the right thing by federalizing the VA guard and condemning McAuliffe. Instead, somehow the media spun it that he was praising the Nazis. The left's base views antifa-BLM with awe, and has been fed a narrative that right-wing violence has been ignored by an Islamophobic media. A perfect storm.

    *Breitbart has faced significant declines in its ad revenue thanks to leftist pressure. The Mercers don't have the kind of wealth that a Zuck, Gates, Buffett or Soros does.

    I’d also suggest that the Mueller probe may have found some new financial shenanigans surrounding the Kushner family, and that is being used as leverage to force Trump into screwing his base. I put the odds of coup at 80%, with a 20% chance that Trump has simply given up and is phoning it in. I have no confidence at all in the Cruzbot view that Trump was “always a Democrat” and planned this all along.

    I don’t think we have much of a shot in federal politics anymore. Best to focus on personal lifestyle changes (relocation, boycotts, self-improvement), and try to build up from the local level.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @jb
    No, it's isn't nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don't punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can't repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can't go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That's just the way the world works -- our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors' prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here's the thing: if you really can't understand that it's immoral to deport someone to a country they don't remember, where they don't even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that's what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    Leaving that aside though, here’s the thing: if you really can’t understand that it’s immoral to deport someone to a country they don’t remember, where they don’t even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that’s what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    You have it completely backwards. These people are the lawful subjects of the countries from whence they came, and it is actually unjust and immoral not to send them back where they belong. Angela Merkel thinks that, because her country is facing demographic doom and needs low-wage workers, it’s perfectly okay for her to simply steal the population of Syria. Some may call this compassion and others, taking a more cynical view, try to justify it on economic grounds, but let’s just call it what it is: One of the biggest slave raids in history. The United States is doing the same thing to Mexico and Central America. Our Latin neighbors permit and encourage this sort of thing for the time being, because their dispersed populations in the US send back huge amounts of remittances and they are more valuable to their country here than they are back home. But if those remittances were to dry up, and if Mexico itself were suffering a shortage of workers, the cry would be exactly the opposite. Then you would hear the Hispanderers screaming, “You brought us to your steenking country to work as slaves in your fields! Send us home! Let my people go!”

    It is actually not difficult to change the incentive structure such that the Latins would self-deport. All we need to do is start enforcing workplace compliance and deny banking and wire transfer access to illegals. If we stop paying them, they won’t come here. I don’t know if our rancid political class will ever do this willingly, but the next Great Devaluation may be so awful that it will change the calculus nonetheless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Recently, I tried to get a postal money order in Japan to send Steve 5000 big ones. Major hassle. They wanted me to define my relationship with Steve and purpose for sending the money order. (I understand the issue is remittances going overseas from Koreans and Chinese, but from white guy to another in an allied nation?) Anyhow, the hassle and time was pretty effective at deterring me from doing that again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @J.Ross
    I'm sure you are right. Twenty posts with the same wording appeared at the same time because of all the individuality going around.

    20 comments, huh? Under this here Steve Sailer post, you say? Just give me 10 comment numbers, or even 5, that are very close to the same wording to prove your point. I would have noticed because I read them all. I’m pretty sure you don’t, Mr. Ross.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @jb
    No, it's isn't nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don't punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can't repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can't go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That's just the way the world works -- our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors' prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here's the thing: if you really can't understand that it's immoral to deport someone to a country they don't remember, where they don't even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that's what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can’t repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can’t go after you.

    That’s not a really good example, JB, because a college education can’t be taken back. If you are driving a stolen car that your parents handed down to you, and the owner finds out, he has every right to take it back – also not the best example because of depreciation.

    What if you quit paying your property taxes on your house, JB, cause you really can’t support all the illegals that have filled up the elementary schools? Maybe you live in NY or CA or TX with HIGH taxes. Do you think they will evict you but leave your kids there? I really doubt it.

    What do you mean “don’t speak the language”? English? There are huge areas around the country in which immigrants, illegal or not, just don’t need to learn English anymore. Are you talking about the 4 or 5 valedictorians in that crowd of 1/2 million to 1 million? He can be a valedictorian in Mexico just as easily!

    You either enforce the law against illegal entry or you don’t. You’re really being a sap here. Commenters on unz and writers on VDare (immigration policy and history is their bread and butter) have told you that it’s no 1/2 million people either. By the time family members come and others get in on the AMNESTY that are not even eligible, it’ll be up to 3 million or so. Just a drop in the bucket right, the population of one of the smaller states?!

    People like you are the problem, along with a wishy-washy can’t-do president.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jb
    Actually a college education can be taken back! Not the education itself, but the money that was stolen to pay for it, which is all the people it was stolen from care about anyway. The children of swindlers could be required to pay back all the money their parents spent on them -- food, housing, college tuition, etc. In fact they could be required to pay back all the money their parents stole, even if it was all pissed away by the parents and the children never saw a penny. We could do that, but we don't, do we? Because it isn't our way to punish the children for the sins of the parents! There may be situations where children have to return stolen goods, but there are plenty of other situations where the children get off scot-free. Try dunning the Kennedys for all the money their great-granddaddy stole! For that matter, while we may have made some improvements, it's certainly true to say that the white man stole America. Stole it fair and square! Do you think we are morally obligated to give it back now?

    So yes, my example was actually a good one -- you just didn't realize it because you are consumed with hostility towards the illegals. So you make tendentious hand-waving arguments against them that you would never accept in other contexts. And the thing is, this is perfectly obvious to everyone, and it destroys your credibility when arguing with anyone who isn't already solidly on your side (and even many who are, like me). If you don't understand this, then you don't understand anything.

    The thing is, I don't give a damn about the illegals who are already here. They aren't that important. The important thing is to stop the tsunami that is on its way! The RAISE Act, while not perfect, is a big step in that direction. In fact, if passed it would be the first serious legislative step we've taken in that direction since, I don't know, 1924? Don't you think getting it passed would be worth a limited amnesty (reread my proposal!) for a relatively small group that -- let's be honest -- is never going to be deported anyway? Most of their parents are never going to be deported either, but for the sake of deterrence I nevertheless support terrorizing them with the threat of deportation and forcing them to live in the shadows, because they knowingly chose those shadows when they came here. With the children though it's just a losing argument, and it hurts our cause. We're idiots if we pass up the opportunity to trade that moral dead weight away in return for something we care about.
    , @3g4me
    @165 Achmed E. Newman: "People like you are the problem . . . "

    Virtue signalers are gonna virtue signal. It's "who they are." They lack a quintessential understanding of the words "we" (That's not who we are!) and "our" (If that's what our side stands for . . . ). Call it flawed bonding at birth. Maybe their mommas didn't smile at them enough while reading them "Heather Has Two Mommies."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Bill Jones
    "Democratic position on many specific immigration policy questions is more popular than the Republican position,"

    Has anybody ever seen a large scal survey of the electorate in general on immigration preferences?

    " senators with more hardline positions have done better against primary challengers; those with more moderate views have done worse."

    only in the diseased minds of the corporate media whores is the destruction of the country by importing unlimited numbers of pig-ignorant violent peasants a "moderate view"

    Dave Brat took out Cantor largely b/c of daves sensible and firm positions on immigration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. jb says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can’t repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can’t go after you.
     
    That's not a really good example, JB, because a college education can't be taken back. If you are driving a stolen car that your parents handed down to you, and the owner finds out, he has every right to take it back - also not the best example because of depreciation.

    What if you quit paying your property taxes on your house, JB, cause you really can't support all the illegals that have filled up the elementary schools? Maybe you live in NY or CA or TX with HIGH taxes. Do you think they will evict you but leave your kids there? I really doubt it.

    What do you mean "don't speak the language"? English? There are huge areas around the country in which immigrants, illegal or not, just don't need to learn English anymore. Are you talking about the 4 or 5 valedictorians in that crowd of 1/2 million to 1 million? He can be a valedictorian in Mexico just as easily!

    You either enforce the law against illegal entry or you don't. You're really being a sap here. Commenters on unz and writers on VDare (immigration policy and history is their bread and butter) have told you that it's no 1/2 million people either. By the time family members come and others get in on the AMNESTY that are not even eligible, it'll be up to 3 million or so. Just a drop in the bucket right, the population of one of the smaller states?!

    People like you are the problem, along with a wishy-washy can't-do president.

    Actually a college education can be taken back! Not the education itself, but the money that was stolen to pay for it, which is all the people it was stolen from care about anyway. The children of swindlers could be required to pay back all the money their parents spent on them — food, housing, college tuition, etc. In fact they could be required to pay back all the money their parents stole, even if it was all pissed away by the parents and the children never saw a penny. We could do that, but we don’t, do we? Because it isn’t our way to punish the children for the sins of the parents! There may be situations where children have to return stolen goods, but there are plenty of other situations where the children get off scot-free. Try dunning the Kennedys for all the money their great-granddaddy stole! For that matter, while we may have made some improvements, it’s certainly true to say that the white man stole America. Stole it fair and square! Do you think we are morally obligated to give it back now?

    So yes, my example was actually a good one — you just didn’t realize it because you are consumed with hostility towards the illegals. So you make tendentious hand-waving arguments against them that you would never accept in other contexts. And the thing is, this is perfectly obvious to everyone, and it destroys your credibility when arguing with anyone who isn’t already solidly on your side (and even many who are, like me). If you don’t understand this, then you don’t understand anything.

    The thing is, I don’t give a damn about the illegals who are already here. They aren’t that important. The important thing is to stop the tsunami that is on its way! The RAISE Act, while not perfect, is a big step in that direction. In fact, if passed it would be the first serious legislative step we’ve taken in that direction since, I don’t know, 1924? Don’t you think getting it passed would be worth a limited amnesty (reread my proposal!) for a relatively small group that — let’s be honest — is never going to be deported anyway? Most of their parents are never going to be deported either, but for the sake of deterrence I nevertheless support terrorizing them with the threat of deportation and forcing them to live in the shadows, because they knowingly chose those shadows when they came here. With the children though it’s just a losing argument, and it hurts our cause. We’re idiots if we pass up the opportunity to trade that moral dead weight away in return for something we care about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    The thing is, I don’t give a damn about the illegals who are already here. They aren’t that important. The important thing is to stop the tsunami that is on its way!

    Birthright citizenship is the most important thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Dump Trump

    Meanwhile, back in the darkest recesses of the US House of Representatives : Paul Ryan is shitting bricks. Ryan may want DACA as a “stand-alone” with all his heart and soul, but if he rams a “clean” DACA bill through with Dem. votes and a few Rep. RINOs, Wisconsin’s Eddie Munster will be out of a job and will be forced to ask his rich wife for the keys, every time he wants to take the family limo out for a spin!
     
    I wouldn't bet on it. Wisconsinites are a bunch of cucks who elected this POS umpteen times in the first place. They went for Obama in 2012.

    I agree with you 100 percent.

    The electorate cannot be trusted to do the right thing on almost any issue that is critically important to the survival of the Republic.

    If their wisdom was as vaunted as one might hope, traitorous scum like Ryan and McCain would never have been re-elected over and over and over again.

    If you pin your hopes on the wisdom of the electorate you will inevitably be disappointed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Charles Erwin Wilson

    He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved.
     
    Thank you for providing the quintessential example of projection. Setting aside your glaring stupidity we can all admire your combination of a lack of self awareness with an inability to see more than one millisecond into the future.

    Your cautionary example is noted.

    I’m afraid it is you who is too stupid to see the long term implication of this shit deal. In 1986 Reagan gave amnesty to 2.6m, 30 years later we have 30m more illegals. This shit deal gave 3.3m-5m blanket amnesty and they are free to gain citizenship in 5 years, not to mention the many more relatives they will begin to sponsor and bring in. The GOP won the last election by 84,000 votes, they might as well kiss the WH and Congress goodbye when these DACA people become citizens. They won’t be thanking Trump and the GOP, they’ll be thanking Chuck Schumer and Dems as their savior. He could’ve used DACA as a bargaining chip to secure the RAISE act and the wall, instead he just gave it away. Utter stupidity and only the equally stupid will continue to defend him.

    Also, your man just signed the anti-hate speech resolution which is essentially a direct assault on the First Amendment. But keep defending him moron.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. @Intelligent Dasein

    Leaving that aside though, here’s the thing: if you really can’t understand that it’s immoral to deport someone to a country they don’t remember, where they don’t even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that’s what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!
     
    You have it completely backwards. These people are the lawful subjects of the countries from whence they came, and it is actually unjust and immoral not to send them back where they belong. Angela Merkel thinks that, because her country is facing demographic doom and needs low-wage workers, it's perfectly okay for her to simply steal the population of Syria. Some may call this compassion and others, taking a more cynical view, try to justify it on economic grounds, but let's just call it what it is: One of the biggest slave raids in history. The United States is doing the same thing to Mexico and Central America. Our Latin neighbors permit and encourage this sort of thing for the time being, because their dispersed populations in the US send back huge amounts of remittances and they are more valuable to their country here than they are back home. But if those remittances were to dry up, and if Mexico itself were suffering a shortage of workers, the cry would be exactly the opposite. Then you would hear the Hispanderers screaming, "You brought us to your steenking country to work as slaves in your fields! Send us home! Let my people go!"

    It is actually not difficult to change the incentive structure such that the Latins would self-deport. All we need to do is start enforcing workplace compliance and deny banking and wire transfer access to illegals. If we stop paying them, they won't come here. I don't know if our rancid political class will ever do this willingly, but the next Great Devaluation may be so awful that it will change the calculus nonetheless.

    Recently, I tried to get a postal money order in Japan to send Steve 5000 big ones. Major hassle. They wanted me to define my relationship with Steve and purpose for sending the money order. (I understand the issue is remittances going overseas from Koreans and Chinese, but from white guy to another in an allied nation?) Anyhow, the hassle and time was pretty effective at deterring me from doing that again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @anon
    Was it Trump's prejudice against Mexicans that appealed to voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania or was it his defiance against politically correct norms, the same ones that are actively encouraging black lives matters and doing damage to Midwestern cities?

    I doubt people in economically depressed parts of the Midwest see many Mexicans and would not spend much time thinking about them.

    So it was not Trump's hardline against Mexican immigration that carried his campaign. It was his anti-political correctness embodied in his message denigrating Mexicans.

    Trump has never denigrated Mexicans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Trump portrayed Mexican migrants as largely made up of rapists. To cast an entire group of millions of people in this way is not accurate and highly racially provocative. Trump denigrated Mexicans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Opinionator
    He’s a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved.

    A buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle wouldn't have stood up for truth and principle as Trump did at that Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.

    A buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle wouldn’t have stood up for truth and principle as Trump did at that Trump Tower press conference post-Charlottesville.

    Darn good point Opinionator. Trump could have done better calling out antifa thugs by name and continual leftist totalitarian speech suppression. But in the context of the moment and the media’s lock step fake narrative it was impressive. Trump alone stood up for truth while the cucks were mewling.

    That’s the thing with Trump. The guy’s efforts with be confused, incoherent, or he looks to be rolling over … and then suddenly there’s this flash of an actual man of principle. Chaotic–as with all things Trump–but distinctly there. That’s what makes Trump so darn frustrating. But I guess it beats swallowing the black pill.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @jb
    Actually a college education can be taken back! Not the education itself, but the money that was stolen to pay for it, which is all the people it was stolen from care about anyway. The children of swindlers could be required to pay back all the money their parents spent on them -- food, housing, college tuition, etc. In fact they could be required to pay back all the money their parents stole, even if it was all pissed away by the parents and the children never saw a penny. We could do that, but we don't, do we? Because it isn't our way to punish the children for the sins of the parents! There may be situations where children have to return stolen goods, but there are plenty of other situations where the children get off scot-free. Try dunning the Kennedys for all the money their great-granddaddy stole! For that matter, while we may have made some improvements, it's certainly true to say that the white man stole America. Stole it fair and square! Do you think we are morally obligated to give it back now?

    So yes, my example was actually a good one -- you just didn't realize it because you are consumed with hostility towards the illegals. So you make tendentious hand-waving arguments against them that you would never accept in other contexts. And the thing is, this is perfectly obvious to everyone, and it destroys your credibility when arguing with anyone who isn't already solidly on your side (and even many who are, like me). If you don't understand this, then you don't understand anything.

    The thing is, I don't give a damn about the illegals who are already here. They aren't that important. The important thing is to stop the tsunami that is on its way! The RAISE Act, while not perfect, is a big step in that direction. In fact, if passed it would be the first serious legislative step we've taken in that direction since, I don't know, 1924? Don't you think getting it passed would be worth a limited amnesty (reread my proposal!) for a relatively small group that -- let's be honest -- is never going to be deported anyway? Most of their parents are never going to be deported either, but for the sake of deterrence I nevertheless support terrorizing them with the threat of deportation and forcing them to live in the shadows, because they knowingly chose those shadows when they came here. With the children though it's just a losing argument, and it hurts our cause. We're idiots if we pass up the opportunity to trade that moral dead weight away in return for something we care about.

    The thing is, I don’t give a damn about the illegals who are already here. They aren’t that important. The important thing is to stop the tsunami that is on its way!

    Birthright citizenship is the most important thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jb
    No, reducing illegal immigration is the most important thing! Cut down the number of illegals giving birth on American soil and birthright citizenship becomes almost a moot point. Sure, you still have to worry about birth tourism, but the numbers would be reduced by at least an order of magnitude, and probably much more.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. President Trump follows Ann Coulter on Twitter. Ann Coulter has been doing a damn good job speaking for tens of millions of voters who are angry about Trump’s wobbly weakness on immigration.

    Ann Coulter has now used the Kobach II superweapon in an effort to help President Trump govern the same way he campaigned.

    Kobach II superweapon deployed:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    Good for Ann, she is really pissed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @Kevin C.
    Sure, halting the current inflow would help greatly (and removing the illegals present even more so). But first, that's never going to happen; our Ruling Elites will never allow it (and it's what they say, and not what the president or Congress says, that is enforced). And secondly, even if it did, it wouldn't be enough to stop the demographic trends already "baked-in" ensuring a white minority (and thus permanent Democrat majority) within a generation or so.

    The point, though, is that the inflow is not going to stop, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever we can do to change it.

    The point, though, is that the inflow is not going to stop, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever we can do to change it.

    Kevin, you’re discussing the birthright citizenship issue intelligently. Why do you then toss out this sort of blackpill nonsense.

    The US’s situation is more difficult than Europe’s where the flow across the Med is trivially easy to stop. But it is still relatively easy to stop.

    You build a wall to significantly cut back the flow significantly–once the probability of a successful trip gets very low people stop trying in any great number (see Berlin Wall)–and have mandatory E-verify to squelch the draw. Trump could–with a reasonably coherent speech on the matter–get both of those in exchange for DACA.

    Heck, even without that Trump as commander-in-chief could deploy the army to the border and stop the flow immediately.

    So your “absolutely nothing whatsoever” is contradicted by the obvious and straightforward path of simply “electing a President committed to doing it”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    You build a wall to significantly cut back the flow significantly
     
    The Wall will never be built; our ruling elites will never allow it. And Iron Law of Oligarchy: only elites matter; the peasants and their opinions make no difference.

    Trump could–with a reasonably coherent speech on the matter–get both of those in exchange for DACA.
     
    In the same way Reagan got the promised increase in enforcement in exchange for his amnesty; which is to say, not at all. It'll be DACA amnesty now in exchange for "the wall" and "mandatory E-verify" later, where "later" turns inevitably into never. Why should the Establishment give anything to Trump? He's a powerless puppet like any other elected official in modern America. They can do whatever they want, and there's nothing Trump, or any other president, can do to stop them.

    Heck, even without that Trump as commander-in-chief could deploy the army to the border and stop the flow immediately.
     
    Not really. If he tried, the lefty generals would hmm and haw, and talk at length about how any such troop movements will take time, and that they'll have to get logistics in place, and that requires conducting a study — much like how, in response to Trump ordering trannies out of the military, Mattis commissioned not the drawing up of discharge papers, but the conducting of "a study" into the issue — and otherwise engage in every sort of foot-dragging technique just short of outright insubordination, and delay long enough for one or another liberal judge to declare the whole thing an illegal violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

    If the President orders ICE to, say, keep out Muslims, and ICE defies him and keeps letting them in anyway, what can he do about it? It doesn't matter how “committed to doing it” the person we elect is, the president is only one man, with the power to issue orders. But those orders have power only if those to whom they are issued obey them. If the president orders something done, and the Federal agency whose job is to carry out that order ignores or defies it — with backing by the leftist courts, the media, etc. — then it simply doesn't get done, and the order is meaningless. Our permanent bureaucracy obeys only those presidential orders they want to, and effectively defy, through bureaucratic trickery and court orders, any they don't wish to follow. They, and not any elected officials, are our true rulers, and they answer to no one. We can no more remove them from over us than medieval peasants could remove their lords from over them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. guest says:
    @Maj. Kong
    Our side has almost zero cultural power. As Breitbart said, "politics flows downstream from culture"

    Unless you can get an armed mob to burn Yale University to the ground (almost happened in 1841), they are protected by their large endowments, well-connected alumni and the transnational billionaires that fund most of the CultMarx establishment.

    The average normie saw a scary crowd of armed Nazis, saying that "Jews will not replace us" (I always thought it was "you"). And we had one instance of one rioter firing a warning shot at another with an improvised flamethrower. That could have easily led to a shooting war. Both sides and the police/NG were armed with rifles.

    Trump doesn't pay much attention to the details, and he didn't do the right thing by federalizing the VA guard and condemning McAuliffe. Instead, somehow the media spun it that he was praising the Nazis. The left's base views antifa-BLM with awe, and has been fed a narrative that right-wing violence has been ignored by an Islamophobic media. A perfect storm.

    *Breitbart has faced significant declines in its ad revenue thanks to leftist pressure. The Mercers don't have the kind of wealth that a Zuck, Gates, Buffett or Soros does.

    I know all that, but what’s the big deal? It’s not a reason to give in. They’ll embarrass themselves soon enough, because they can’t help it.

    If our side can’t weather Nazi storms, there’s no point. If the Hitler card is unbeatable, why are we even playing?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. 3g4me says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can’t repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can’t go after you.
     
    That's not a really good example, JB, because a college education can't be taken back. If you are driving a stolen car that your parents handed down to you, and the owner finds out, he has every right to take it back - also not the best example because of depreciation.

    What if you quit paying your property taxes on your house, JB, cause you really can't support all the illegals that have filled up the elementary schools? Maybe you live in NY or CA or TX with HIGH taxes. Do you think they will evict you but leave your kids there? I really doubt it.

    What do you mean "don't speak the language"? English? There are huge areas around the country in which immigrants, illegal or not, just don't need to learn English anymore. Are you talking about the 4 or 5 valedictorians in that crowd of 1/2 million to 1 million? He can be a valedictorian in Mexico just as easily!

    You either enforce the law against illegal entry or you don't. You're really being a sap here. Commenters on unz and writers on VDare (immigration policy and history is their bread and butter) have told you that it's no 1/2 million people either. By the time family members come and others get in on the AMNESTY that are not even eligible, it'll be up to 3 million or so. Just a drop in the bucket right, the population of one of the smaller states?!

    People like you are the problem, along with a wishy-washy can't-do president.

    @165 Achmed E. Newman: “People like you are the problem . . . ”

    Virtue signalers are gonna virtue signal. It’s “who they are.” They lack a quintessential understanding of the words “we” (That’s not who we are!) and “our” (If that’s what our side stands for . . . ). Call it flawed bonding at birth. Maybe their mommas didn’t smile at them enough while reading them “Heather Has Two Mommies.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. gregor says:
    @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    “DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn’t bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries.”

    This is a great idea. But is the RAISE Act actually a hard quota system? My impression is that the 50% eventual reduction is just projected with the drop in family reunification claims. As far as I know, they aren’t proposing fixed limits by country. Or are they?

    “The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation.”

    Eh, it is their strongest point, but at the same time there is a reason no country in the world gives citizenship to people that enter illegally as minors.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Porter on Trump and DACA:

    Who is innocent and obligated in DACA. And who will wear white if Trump and Schumer wed.

    https://kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/15/innocence-and-obligation/amp/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  180. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Opinionator
    Trump has never denigrated Mexicans.

    Trump portrayed Mexican migrants as largely made up of rapists. To cast an entire group of millions of people in this way is not accurate and highly racially provocative. Trump denigrated Mexicans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    He was talking about Mexican migrants, not about Mexicans. And even then, he was only referring to a subset of those migrants--that some of them are rapists. By all accounts this is true.

    His statement in fact could be interepreted as praise for the Mexican people in general: it was a complaint that the United States (in Trump's view, not necessarily mine) is not receiving Mexico's best elements but instead some of its worst due to self selection.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Realist says:
    @MBlanc46
    We inow what must be done, but it doesn't look as if Donald Trump knows. He acts as if he hasn't a clue about why people voted for him.

    Trump is a one termer dumb ass. But it doesn’t matter, who ever is elected the out come will be the same.
    The Deep State will not be denied.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kevin C.
    • Replies: @Kevin C.

    But it doesn’t matter, who ever is elected the out come will be the same.
    The Deep State will not be denied.
     
    Exactly so.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Realist says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    President Trump follows Ann Coulter on Twitter. Ann Coulter has been doing a damn good job speaking for tens of millions of voters who are angry about Trump's wobbly weakness on immigration.

    Ann Coulter has now used the Kobach II superweapon in an effort to help President Trump govern the same way he campaigned.

    Kobach II superweapon deployed:

    https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/908744622549106690

    https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/908746829378015233

    Good for Ann, she is really pissed

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Realist says:
    @Dump Trump

    This is far enough in advance of the primaries that there may be a vote on amnesty under the guise of DACA that would permit there to emerge Republican primary challengers to incumbents who voted for amnesty. Trump’s “cucking” may help draw out far more Republicans in the Congress to show their true colors...
     
    Still holding out for that 18D chess scenario I see. I'm afraid you've given the man too much credit. He's a buffoon with zero integrity and zero principle, a thin skin megalomaniac who lives for the applause and just wants to be loved. Now he's hated by all. The Dems will never love him, and his base hate him even more, save for a few die-hard fan boys/girls from the Appalachian.

    Give it up. You can tell from the way he talks the man is about an inch deep, with nothing but hot air and a bad comb-over between the ears. He is no thinker or strategic playmaker. He just got outplayed by a cunning Jew. He blusters, lies and then caves completely. He's as good as dead to me.

    Excellent comments. It is hard to fathom how god damn dumb a person would have to be to defend Trump after his perfidious actions toward his supporters

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Nothing is set in stone yet.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @Realist
    Excellent comments. It is hard to fathom how god damn dumb a person would have to be to defend Trump after his perfidious actions toward his supporters

    Nothing is set in stone yet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    It will be Trump has done little else but screw over his base.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Pat Boyle says:
    @BEER/ we're all going to die
    Yes we know, Trump can be a hero. The people presented Trump a golden opportunity for historic glory. Or a one term POTUS, hated by his former supporters in addition to all those that would hate him even if he cured cancer, which is a hell of a lot of people. It's clear enough what must be done and amnesty is off the damn table. Next up, birthright citizenship, H1B visas, and limiting immigration to attractive white women from Europe that need protection from monsters like Angela Merkel and Merkel's Moslem men.

    I have a vision of a TV special from the late twenty first century on the politics of the early twenty first century.

    “Today lets us recall former President Donald Trump. He is now known principally as the first major world leader to build a wall. Nowadays in 2083, of course, all nations have surrounding walls. It’s hard to imagine how any nation could have survived the population explosion of mid-century from Africa and South America without strong walls and the will to sink migrants in boats”.

    ” He will be remembered as the one man who showed us a way to survive the onslaught of third world paupers that nearly sank civilization.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. MarkinLA says:
    @Kevin C.

    They are citizens of a foreign country and cannot be drafted just like any other foreigner.
     
    So, neither can women be drafted. And just because they're citizens of a foreign country doesn't mean they aren't "under our jurisdiction" if physically present. Can a cop arrest them, here in the US, for violations of US law? Then they're under our jurisdiction.

    Any treaties that apply to citizens of their home country would apply to them.
     
    Again, under current legal understandings, reinforced by the various international laws and treaties intended to prevent "stateless persons", those are totally irrelevant with regards to being "under our jurisdiction". Are they physically present on US soil, not sovereign territory of another nation (as per embasies or certain "Native" lands)? Are they subject to our laws, rather than having sovereign immunity, diplomatic immunity, or extraterritorial privilege? Then they're "under our jurisdiction", no matter what other country they're a citizen of, and their children born in America are US citizens by the Constitution. This is well-established national and international jurisprudence, a matter of the very legal definition of "jurisdiction". An illegal immigrant is, unquestionably as a matter of law, "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, and so jus soli applies to all their anchor babies until the Fourteenth Amendment is amended, which is never going to happen.

    So, neither can women be drafted.

    This is just plain dumb. Yes, the US Congress can pass a law that says women who are citizens of the US can be drafted just like men. The US Congress cannot pass a law that says any Mexican currently residing in the US can be drafted into the American Army and legally enforce it. We went to war with Britain over them pressing American citizens into Royal Navy ships.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Those were sailors on the high seas being impressed, not Americans who hung around London without papers for 10 years.

    I think if Congress tried hard enough they could find work-arounds, like drafting Mexican nationals who stayed around illegally for a certain period of time. Just so as not to ensnare passersby.

    It might be worth it just to hear other countries and illegals themselves loudly declare for all to hear that they're not Americans. "How dare you call us American! We were Mexican all along, you fools! How could you possibly have thought otherwise?"

    How indeed?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. MarkinLA says:
    @Dmitry134564
    We are all aware that Mexico is somewhat of a failed country, much like India, Russia, Brazil etc. But I need to read more negative data on the actual impact of the specific Mexican immigrants we are getting (such as their unemployment rates), before making a judgement.

    There are some immigrants from not very successful countries, who nonetheless can add to the country a lot in terms of skills, patriotic feeling and education. The country doesn't always tell you everything about the immigrants who come from that country - if you got the intellectual elite of Mexico (I'm not saying that's happening at all!), then I would be hard pressed to see it as bad.

    Look at California to see what kind of immigrants from Mexico we are getting. Everywhere there has been a large influx of Mexicans, the school results have gone down.

    Why would the Mexican elite want to come here to live? They can visit any time they want and they run the place down there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. MarkinLA says:
    @Dmitry134564
    Family re-unification laws and birth right citizenship need to be eliminated, even as more of a priority than the issue of preventing illegal immigration, and removing illegal immigrants.

    In replacement of all this - there needs to be a merit based system, based on rational principles, that attempts to find the most talented and educated immigrants (those who can contribute the most to American science and the economy) from around the world.

    There are already visas for exceptionally talented people the O-1 visa.

    http://www.visapro.com/O1-Visa/O1-Visa.asp?_kk=o%201%20visa&_kt=cd61638f-d994-4304-b0a5-7ef60aa9f155

    The problem is the basket of visas for mediocrities like H-1B and H-2.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. Realist says:
    @Opinionator
    Nothing is set in stone yet.

    It will be Trump has done little else but screw over his base.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. MarkinLA says:
    @jb
    No, it's isn't nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don't punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can't repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can't go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That's just the way the world works -- our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors' prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here's the thing: if you really can't understand that it's immoral to deport someone to a country they don't remember, where they don't even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that's what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    Generally, they speak the language of their parents at home. The parents and the kid can be deported at the same time which will make the transition easier. You have just bought into the silly “feelings” argument.

    Enforcing the law is tough and some people like the kids of the bank robber or drug dealer when the dad goes off to prison get hurt. But, hey, that’s life.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jb
    Sure, if a kid is a minor and living with a parent, it probably makes sense to deport them both.

    But what about a 28 year old brought here when he was two, who has absolutely no recollection of the country or knowledge of the language, and who maybe just found out about his legal status? Deporting him is clearly wrong, and this is based on more than just the feelz. It's based on the idea that it is wrong to punish someone for an act they had no control over. This is a well established part of our legal system, and I think it is as applicable here as anywhere.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. EdwardM says:
    @RonaldB
    In my opinion, Sessions stabbed Trump in the back by recusing himself from the Russian investigation, and allowing an unscrupulous anti-Trumper with complete connections to the Deep State to carry out an unlimited investigation of Trump and all Trump's associates. Sessions was being self-indulgent when he shirked his responsibility to make sure an equitable legal process was followed.

    Anyway, Trump now has a tenacious, unprincipled prosecutor harassing not only him, but all his family and associates. Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.

    With this sort of threat, it's no wonder that Trump is off his game. I don't say this to make excuses for his turning his back on his most fundamental campaign issues, but it's difficult to see Sessions petulant action as not being a turning point in following Trump's original agenda.

    Either Sessions is a deep-cover agent of the Deep State, or else so rigid and vain that his image is more important to him than anything else.

    A third possibility: Sessions is an honorable, humble man who can only do what he knows to be right. He stated quite clearly during a Senate hearing that he felt he had to recuse himself from the investigation of Russian interference in the campaign because, according to black-letter DOJ rules, he can’t oversee an investigation of a campaign that he was part of.

    You could fairly say that this makes Sessions naive, not fit for such an important job in such a toxic anti-Trump environment, and/or that he should have foreseen this chain of events and not accepted the job as AG. But I wouldn’t criticize him for anything beyond his lack of sufficient cynicism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. jb says:
    @MarkinLA
    Generally, they speak the language of their parents at home. The parents and the kid can be deported at the same time which will make the transition easier. You have just bought into the silly "feelings" argument.

    Enforcing the law is tough and some people like the kids of the bank robber or drug dealer when the dad goes off to prison get hurt. But, hey, that's life.

    Sure, if a kid is a minor and living with a parent, it probably makes sense to deport them both.

    But what about a 28 year old brought here when he was two, who has absolutely no recollection of the country or knowledge of the language, and who maybe just found out about his legal status? Deporting him is clearly wrong, and this is based on more than just the feelz. It’s based on the idea that it is wrong to punish someone for an act they had no control over. This is a well established part of our legal system, and I think it is as applicable here as anywhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    On the other hand, this would be the very definition of "TRANSFECTING." the deliberate insertion of a foreign DNA into the cell by a FOREIGN agency, the parents. What could be more nuts than allowing auslanders to control the genetic destiny of a nation because of, "The Megaphone?"
    , @MarkinLA
    It’s based on the idea that it is wrong to punish someone for an act they had no control over.

    Yeah, the kid just found out at 28 that he was an illegal. How many bridges do you buy in a year? He could have left at 18 and gone back to Mexico where he belongs. Deporting him is what is needed to make sure nobody else does what his parents did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @anonymous
    Trump portrayed Mexican migrants as largely made up of rapists. To cast an entire group of millions of people in this way is not accurate and highly racially provocative. Trump denigrated Mexicans.

    He was talking about Mexican migrants, not about Mexicans. And even then, he was only referring to a subset of those migrants–that some of them are rapists. By all accounts this is true.

    His statement in fact could be interepreted as praise for the Mexican people in general: it was a complaint that the United States (in Trump’s view, not necessarily mine) is not receiving Mexico’s best elements but instead some of its worst due to self selection.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    He was speaking of migrants but as noted he aimed his comments at a group that included millions of people. This is so large as to functionally not be a subset but representative of Mexicans .

    He constructed his comments not in a way to convey that some--a small fraction--of Mexican migrants were rapists but that it was the predominant type among them and only a minority fraction were good people unlike that rapist element.

    This is all in the context of him speaking as a politician where attack language against a group is taken more seriously than in about any other public context. If he had said this on the Howard Stern Show outside of the context of campaigning this would have been nowhere near as big of a deal because it would have been as serious and therefore not as provocative racial denigration. Trump should be accountable for his reckless decision.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. guest says:
    @jb
    Trump needs to staple a well considered version of DACA to the RAISE Act and push them through together. This is such a no-brainer that I don't understand why it isn't happening already.

    By "well considered" I mean a DACA amnesty that gives the DREAMers everything they care about, while giving the Democrats nothing they care about. The DREAMers get security. They get truly permanent status, and can't be deported for anything, even serious felonies. They can work, and their children will be American citizens. These things are all they really care about. What they do not get is the right to vote, or to bring in their relatives. These are the things the Democrats care about.

    This would be implemented by giving the DREAMers a new category of green card. We can argue about the details. For optics a possible "path to citizenship" might even be left open, as long as it wasn't automatic. DREAMers would have to apply and qualify for a regular green card like any other immigrant under the new RAISE Act rules before they could go on to become citizens. Most wouldn't bother, and those who did would be counted against the quotas for their countries of origin, which would take away slots for new arrivals from those countries. :-)

    This really needs to happen! The DREAMers are a liability for us. They are the single instance where immigration enthusiasts can make a compelling moral argument against deportation. If we can trade away this liability and get the RAISE Act in return it would be a historic win!!!

    An argument so compelling that I don’t remember it being a real political issue until after Obama’s drastic, illegal, unilateral action. Oh, there were cries of “won’t someone please think of the children!,” as usual. But think about it. Cucked Congress after cucked Congress did nothing about it. Do you remember the nightly news badgering them to act? I don’t.

    I remember some stories of poor kids in turmoil before Obama took action, but nothing like the MSM’s standard moral crusades. Now suddenly after DACA becomes law it’s an unanswerable moral issue? Smacks of rationalization. Especially combined with the fact that–like border fences and walls–it’s not an issue in the rest of the world.

    Plus, I don’t find it a compelling moral argument. Not any more than the idea that Bernie Madoff’s sons should’ve been allowed to keep his ill-gained riches.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. guest says:
    @jb
    No, it's isn't nonsensense. (Or even nonsense!) In our society we don't punish children for the sins of their parents. Children do not inherit the debts of their parents, and that means they often get to keep what their parents stole! For example, if your parents borrow money they know they can't repay, and use it to send you to a fancy college, the bank can go after them, but it can't go after you. So essentially you get to keep what your parents stole. That's just the way the world works -- our part of the world anyway. It beats the hell out of sending kids to debtors' prison!

    Leaving that aside though, here's the thing: if you really can't understand that it's immoral to deport someone to a country they don't remember, where they don't even speak the language, as the consequence of an act they had no control over, then what the fuck is wrong with you anyway? Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever??? If that's what our side stands for, then we are not just doomed, we are rightly doomed!

    “Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever?”

    Yes, way, way back in ancient times, before the Holy DACA was brought down the mountain by Moses. People back then apparently weren’t born knowing how evil they were. Impossibly evil, I might say, because how did America even exist without DACA? Such an idea is scarcely credible. It’s a mystery scholars agree they may never understand.

    You may be merely weighing down the scales of argument with your personal version of “I can’t even,” but in case you don’t know it you sound exactly like a progressive. They can’t comprehend the idea that anyone could possibly be against gay marriage, for instance,without being Literally Hitler. Meanwhile, all of human history until a few Current Years ago somehow didn’t find gay marriage necessary. The issue didn’t even occur to most of them.

    If Trump gives in on DACA, and it becomes our new permanent policy, no doubt the puppetmasters will come up with new moral arguments you find unanswerable, and which shall require our unilateral surrender in order for us not to be pariahs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    which shall require our unilateral surrender in order for us not to be pariahs
     
    Let us agree to be pariahs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. guest says:
    @MarkinLA
    So, neither can women be drafted.

    This is just plain dumb. Yes, the US Congress can pass a law that says women who are citizens of the US can be drafted just like men. The US Congress cannot pass a law that says any Mexican currently residing in the US can be drafted into the American Army and legally enforce it. We went to war with Britain over them pressing American citizens into Royal Navy ships.

    Those were sailors on the high seas being impressed, not Americans who hung around London without papers for 10 years.

    I think if Congress tried hard enough they could find work-arounds, like drafting Mexican nationals who stayed around illegally for a certain period of time. Just so as not to ensnare passersby.

    It might be worth it just to hear other countries and illegals themselves loudly declare for all to hear that they’re not Americans. “How dare you call us American! We were Mexican all along, you fools! How could you possibly have thought otherwise?”

    How indeed?

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    They were US citizens and Britain did not have the legal right to impress them and we went to war with Britain over it. The US cannot arbitrarily declare citizens of another country eligible for our draft without the foreigner agreeing to it personally such as applying for US citizenship.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Kevin C. says:
    @AnotherDad

    The point, though, is that the inflow is not going to stop, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever we can do to change it.
     
    Kevin, you're discussing the birthright citizenship issue intelligently. Why do you then toss out this sort of blackpill nonsense.

    The US's situation is more difficult than Europe's where the flow across the Med is trivially easy to stop. But it is still relatively easy to stop.

    You build a wall to significantly cut back the flow significantly--once the probability of a successful trip gets very low people stop trying in any great number (see Berlin Wall)--and have mandatory E-verify to squelch the draw. Trump could--with a reasonably coherent speech on the matter--get both of those in exchange for DACA.

    Heck, even without that Trump as commander-in-chief could deploy the army to the border and stop the flow immediately.

    So your "absolutely nothing whatsoever" is contradicted by the obvious and straightforward path of simply "electing a President committed to doing it".

    You build a wall to significantly cut back the flow significantly

    The Wall will never be built; our ruling elites will never allow it. And Iron Law of Oligarchy: only elites matter; the peasants and their opinions make no difference.

    Trump could–with a reasonably coherent speech on the matter–get both of those in exchange for DACA.

    In the same way Reagan got the promised increase in enforcement in exchange for his amnesty; which is to say, not at all. It’ll be DACA amnesty now in exchange for “the wall” and “mandatory E-verify” later, where “later” turns inevitably into never. Why should the Establishment give anything to Trump? He’s a powerless puppet like any other elected official in modern America. They can do whatever they want, and there’s nothing Trump, or any other president, can do to stop them.

    Heck, even without that Trump as commander-in-chief could deploy the army to the border and stop the flow immediately.

    Not really. If he tried, the lefty generals would hmm and haw, and talk at length about how any such troop movements will take time, and that they’ll have to get logistics in place, and that requires conducting a study — much like how, in response to Trump ordering trannies out of the military, Mattis commissioned not the drawing up of discharge papers, but the conducting of “a study” into the issue — and otherwise engage in every sort of foot-dragging technique just short of outright insubordination, and delay long enough for one or another liberal judge to declare the whole thing an illegal violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

    If the President orders ICE to, say, keep out Muslims, and ICE defies him and keeps letting them in anyway, what can he do about it? It doesn’t matter how “committed to doing it” the person we elect is, the president is only one man, with the power to issue orders. But those orders have power only if those to whom they are issued obey them. If the president orders something done, and the Federal agency whose job is to carry out that order ignores or defies it — with backing by the leftist courts, the media, etc. — then it simply doesn’t get done, and the order is meaningless. Our permanent bureaucracy obeys only those presidential orders they want to, and effectively defy, through bureaucratic trickery and court orders, any they don’t wish to follow. They, and not any elected officials, are our true rulers, and they answer to no one. We can no more remove them from over us than medieval peasants could remove their lords from over them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. Kevin C. says:
    @Realist
    Trump is a one termer dumb ass. But it doesn't matter, who ever is elected the out come will be the same.
    The Deep State will not be denied.

    But it doesn’t matter, who ever is elected the out come will be the same.
    The Deep State will not be denied.

    Exactly so.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Svigor says:

    The average normie saw a scary crowd of armed Nazis, saying that “Jews will not replace us” (I always thought it was “you”).

    [Emphasis added]

    As if Big Media would lie about such a thing.

    And we had one instance of antifa firing a warning shot at uppity Whites with an improvised flamethrower.

    FIFY.

    Both sides and the police/NG were armed with rifles.

    I have seen no reports of antifa with rifles. On the other hand, I know the altright and the police/NG had them, which does mean both sides had rifles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  200. jb says:
    @Opinionator
    The thing is, I don’t give a damn about the illegals who are already here. They aren’t that important. The important thing is to stop the tsunami that is on its way!

    Birthright citizenship is the most important thing.

    No, reducing illegal immigration is the most important thing! Cut down the number of illegals giving birth on American soil and birthright citizenship becomes almost a moot point. Sure, you still have to worry about birth tourism, but the numbers would be reduced by at least an order of magnitude, and probably much more.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    The United States government hands out millions of work visas to foreigners every year. They are anchor-baby eligible when in the United States.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Opinionator
    He was talking about Mexican migrants, not about Mexicans. And even then, he was only referring to a subset of those migrants--that some of them are rapists. By all accounts this is true.

    His statement in fact could be interepreted as praise for the Mexican people in general: it was a complaint that the United States (in Trump's view, not necessarily mine) is not receiving Mexico's best elements but instead some of its worst due to self selection.

    He was speaking of migrants but as noted he aimed his comments at a group that included millions of people. This is so large as to functionally not be a subset but representative of Mexicans .

    He constructed his comments not in a way to convey that some–a small fraction–of Mexican migrants were rapists but that it was the predominant type among them and only a minority fraction were good people unlike that rapist element.

    This is all in the context of him speaking as a politician where attack language against a group is taken more seriously than in about any other public context. If he had said this on the Howard Stern Show outside of the context of campaigning this would have been nowhere near as big of a deal because it would have been as serious and therefore not as provocative racial denigration. Trump should be accountable for his reckless decision.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. Romanian says: • Website
    @anony-mouse
    Wall for Eastern Europe!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4881776/153-migrants-land-Romania-crossing-Black-Sea.html

    There goes the neighborhood!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @jb
    No, reducing illegal immigration is the most important thing! Cut down the number of illegals giving birth on American soil and birthright citizenship becomes almost a moot point. Sure, you still have to worry about birth tourism, but the numbers would be reduced by at least an order of magnitude, and probably much more.

    The United States government hands out millions of work visas to foreigners every year. They are anchor-baby eligible when in the United States.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jb
    Good point. I still think reducing legal immigration and stopping illegal immigration takes precedence though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. jb says:
    @Opinionator
    The United States government hands out millions of work visas to foreigners every year. They are anchor-baby eligible when in the United States.

    Good point. I still think reducing legal immigration and stopping illegal immigration takes precedence though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Just FYI. According to Breitbart, in 2016 the government issued 4 MILLION visas making foreigners eligible to work in the United States.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/31/dhs-obama-gave-2-3-million-work-permits-migrants-2016/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. map says:
    @gregor
    I came across a particularly aggressive example of DACA boosterism recently in the Atlantic. The article is about DACA medical students.

    I reached Marina Di Bartolo, an internal-medicine doctor at the University of Pennsylvania, on her walk home from the clinic on Thursday. That day, she treated a patient with high blood pressure, another who needed cataract surgery, and someone with a herniated disc from bungee jumping gone wrong. “Not the most glamorous stuff,” she said.

    Di Bartolo’s parents brought her from Venezuela at age 7, then overstayed their tourist visas. Her mother works as a babysitter and housekeeper, and her father does odd jobs and construction.
     

    Very representative, I'm sure. But even in these examples cherry-picked for maximal sympathy, there are still several points that will make anyone but the most committed lib raise an eyebrow.

    Meanwhile, the United States faces a shortage of up to 104,900 physicians, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

    Di Bartolo won a full scholarship to the Yale School of Medicine, and to Princeton before that. But for students who rely on financial aid, the end of DACA would mean they can no longer afford school for a simple reason: Few banks are eager to lend to students legally prohibited from working after graduation.

    “I won’t be able to pay my living expenses, much less my tuition” without loans, said Cesar Montolongo, a professorial MD-Ph.D. student at Loyola-Stritch School of Medicine in Chicago. Montolongo spends his days in a brightly lit lab researching the root causes of urinary tract infections. “It’s bittersweet to have found something you’re happy doing, knowing it might be taken away,” he said.

    Sunny Nakae, the dean of admissions at Loyola-Stritch, said students face “a huge chasm of uncertainty.” Loyola was the first school to actively recruit undocumented students, and has admitted about 30. But even though DACA has been under threat since President Trump’s election, Nakae said she has received more applications from undocumented students this year than ever before.
     

    There may well be a shortage of doctors, but it's more due to restricted residencies not because of a lack of suitable medical school candidates. Either Marina et al are real superstars or more likely illegal aliens are getting affirmative action and receiving massively subsidized educations as they displace better qualified native candidates. Giving coveted med school slots and scholarships to illegals is pure clown world. Let me see the polling on that.

    Moreover, we are supposed to pretend this is typical and that there's no way any of the dreamers could be gangbangers, dropouts, single moms, welfare sponges, etc. And of course amnesty would never incentivize more illegal immigration. Trust us this time.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/09/daca-med-students-face-uncertain-futures/538695/

    I don’t see what the big deal is. Isn’t it a gift to Mexico for all of these brilliant DACA students to be sent back there? Isn’t it obvious that an MD-PHD candidate would be enormously beneficial to Mexico? Doesn’t the rank exceptionalism of all of the DACA students make them obvious candidates for Mexican residency and citizenship?

    I don’t understand. Who wouldn’t take these brilliant, hard-working people with all of their human capital? What a gift we would give Latin America. Remember. Diversity is Strength. If we export our diversity, then won’t we make them strong?

    Why is language a barrier? Can’t they learn Spanish. I mean, their illegal parents learned English.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. @jb
    Good point. I still think reducing legal immigration and stopping illegal immigration takes precedence though.

    Just FYI. According to Breitbart, in 2016 the government issued 4 MILLION visas making foreigners eligible to work in the United States.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/31/dhs-obama-gave-2-3-million-work-permits-migrants-2016/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. @jb
    Sure, if a kid is a minor and living with a parent, it probably makes sense to deport them both.

    But what about a 28 year old brought here when he was two, who has absolutely no recollection of the country or knowledge of the language, and who maybe just found out about his legal status? Deporting him is clearly wrong, and this is based on more than just the feelz. It's based on the idea that it is wrong to punish someone for an act they had no control over. This is a well established part of our legal system, and I think it is as applicable here as anywhere.

    On the other hand, this would be the very definition of “TRANSFECTING.” the deliberate insertion of a foreign DNA into the cell by a FOREIGN agency, the parents. What could be more nuts than allowing auslanders to control the genetic destiny of a nation because of, “The Megaphone?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. MarkinLA says:
    @jb
    Sure, if a kid is a minor and living with a parent, it probably makes sense to deport them both.

    But what about a 28 year old brought here when he was two, who has absolutely no recollection of the country or knowledge of the language, and who maybe just found out about his legal status? Deporting him is clearly wrong, and this is based on more than just the feelz. It's based on the idea that it is wrong to punish someone for an act they had no control over. This is a well established part of our legal system, and I think it is as applicable here as anywhere.

    It’s based on the idea that it is wrong to punish someone for an act they had no control over.

    Yeah, the kid just found out at 28 that he was an illegal. How many bridges do you buy in a year? He could have left at 18 and gone back to Mexico where he belongs. Deporting him is what is needed to make sure nobody else does what his parents did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. MarkinLA says:
    @guest
    Those were sailors on the high seas being impressed, not Americans who hung around London without papers for 10 years.

    I think if Congress tried hard enough they could find work-arounds, like drafting Mexican nationals who stayed around illegally for a certain period of time. Just so as not to ensnare passersby.

    It might be worth it just to hear other countries and illegals themselves loudly declare for all to hear that they're not Americans. "How dare you call us American! We were Mexican all along, you fools! How could you possibly have thought otherwise?"

    How indeed?

    They were US citizens and Britain did not have the legal right to impress them and we went to war with Britain over it. The US cannot arbitrarily declare citizens of another country eligible for our draft without the foreigner agreeing to it personally such as applying for US citizenship.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. @guest
    "Do you really think that can ever be a winning argument? Ever?"

    Yes, way, way back in ancient times, before the Holy DACA was brought down the mountain by Moses. People back then apparently weren't born knowing how evil they were. Impossibly evil, I might say, because how did America even exist without DACA? Such an idea is scarcely credible. It's a mystery scholars agree they may never understand.

    You may be merely weighing down the scales of argument with your personal version of "I can't even," but in case you don't know it you sound exactly like a progressive. They can't comprehend the idea that anyone could possibly be against gay marriage, for instance,without being Literally Hitler. Meanwhile, all of human history until a few Current Years ago somehow didn't find gay marriage necessary. The issue didn't even occur to most of them.

    If Trump gives in on DACA, and it becomes our new permanent policy, no doubt the puppetmasters will come up with new moral arguments you find unanswerable, and which shall require our unilateral surrender in order for us not to be pariahs.

    which shall require our unilateral surrender in order for us not to be pariahs

    Let us agree to be pariahs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @Greasy William
    Nobody cares about what Breitbart says, what Coulter says or what Chuck and Nancy say. We DO care about about what Trump says and this morning Trump said explicitly, amnesty and no wall. His spokespeople all confirmed the same.

    I know that Chuck and Nancy are lying about the agreement they claim to have, but I also know from Trump's own words that he wants to sell us out on this one. By all accounts, he wanted to pass amnesty after getting elected and had to be talked out of it by Grassley and Cornyn, that is how weak Trump's instincts are on immigration.

    The guy has no ideological center and is just a liability to us at this point. We need to get rid of him as soon as possible.

    Just replying to this a few weeks later after the wall prototypes are being built and Trump talked the NFL into a dynamite supposity.

    No amnesty tho. Maybe put down the blackpill.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation