T1B

So 2/3 overstayed visas?

Were the other 1/3 beamed over, Star Trek style?

No.

A few presented themselves as you say, the rest snuck over, usually with the assistance of the Mexican mob.

There is a simple way to solve the overstaying visa problem. Make visa extensions easier to get for those that prove themselves worthy and punish the rest with strict consequences to include a lifetime ban on future visas, no chance of citizenship, evah, and no citizenship for those born here to parents in the country illegally.

88 wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Is building a physical wall the best and most cost efficient way to address illegal immigration?

A sufficient number of voters provided their answer to this question when they elected Donald J. Trump as president.

A significant number have changed their minds.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-p ... -the-wall/

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... compromise

Goober McTuber wrote:

88 wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Is building a physical wall the best and most cost efficient way to address illegal immigration?

A sufficient number of voters provided their answer to this question when they elected Donald J. Trump as president.

A significant number have changed their minds.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-p ... -the-wall/

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... compromise

You must have missed the message.

Trump won the 2016 election, therefore polls are always wrong.

88 wrote:

Mikey wrote:You must have missed the message.

Trump won the 2016 election, therefore polls are always wrong.

Elections have consequences, bub. If Trump builds a wall (which will not happen even if he gets the funding and secures a second term), the voters can toss his ass out and the asses of everyone who supported it. That is how it supposed to work.

I thought you libs were opposed to populists. Now, you oppose a populist (according to you) because his idea is no longer popular (according to your polling), which you admit is really inaccurate. Tedious.

I never made that argument.

88 wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Is building a physical wall the best and most cost efficient way to address illegal immigration?

A sufficient number of voters provided their answer to this question.

When they said Mexico should buy us a wall. Till then stfu you fucking POS.

88 wrote:I am convinced that you cannot avoid lying under any circumstance. You would oppose a border wall if Mexico wrote out a check to pay for 100% of it. You are just being a tedious fuck (aka a loyal member of Team D).

We SHARE the border you stupid snowflake cuck.

.088 wrote:Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!

Trump calculations.

Sure.
Why doubt it?




On balancing the federal budget...


It can be done. ... It will take place and it will go relatively quickly.
... If you have the right people, like, in the agencies and the various
people that do the balancing ... you can cut the numbers by two pennies
and three pennies and balance a budget quickly and have a stronger and
better country.

Don (2/22 and 4/4 2016)



Reality...

2018 budget deficit: 782 billion dollars
2019 projected deficit: 981 billion dollars

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... y-quickly/






And foolish goofballs continue to pimp his blatant bullshit.

88 wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:

If the wall reduces the flow of illegal immigration from Mexico, and the U.S. thus does not have to spend billions to take care of such immigrants, who paid for the wall? Us, who saved billions, or Mexico, which still houses those who would have crossed? Take your time.

Pure bullshit, and you know it. Trump did not mean that, nor did he convey that in any way.

Fact is that Trump lied on the payment of the wall, just as he has lied about hundreds of things.

And his supporters don't seem to care; however, the majority of Americans do care. Trump will not be President by the end of 2019, one way or another he is gone.

I’ll hungus bet you on that one. Accept or decline.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!

So much winning.

Says the guy who told soldiers he gave them a 10% raise.

88 wrote:If the wall reduces the flow of illegal immigration from Mexico, and the U.S. thus does not have to spend billions to take care of such immigrants, who paid for the wall? Us, who saved billions, or Mexico, which still houses those who would have crossed? Take your time.

That would not mean Mexico paid for the wall. That would mean the U.S. paid for the wall, and then attempted to recoup the money through a long term investment. If you support that strategy, fine, but don't try and use mental gymnastics to cover for what Trump originally said or intended as part of his platform that got him elected. You're better than this.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

88 wrote:If the wall reduces the flow of illegal immigration from Mexico, and the U.S. thus does not have to spend billions to take care of such immigrants, who paid for the wall? Us, who saved billions, or Mexico, which still houses those who would have crossed? Take your time.

That would not mean Mexico paid for the wall. That would mean the U.S. paid for the wall, and then attempted to recoup the money through a long term investment. If you support that strategy, fine, but don't try and use mental gymnastics to cover for what Trump originally said or intended as part of his platform that got him elected. You're better than this.

Yeah, wtf is with that clueless orange clown?

Doesn't he realize that politicians can't use rhetoric?

The nerve. :x

But I thought the whole love affair with Tiny Hands is that he speaks plainly. Not a typical politician. So which is it?

I never realized that “rhetorical” and “lying POS” were synonymous.
I guess you can learn something new every day.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:But I thought the whole love affair with Tiny Hands is that he speaks plainly. Not a typical politician. So which is it?

He mostly does. Quite often to his detriment.

He is more honest than most politicians who tend to do most of their lying by omission.

88meltingSeaterJoeShidick think it is just fine because they are disgusting Pieces of Shit.

smackaholic wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:But I thought the whole love affair with Tiny Hands is that he speaks plainly. Not a typical politician. So which is it?

He mostly does. Quite often to his detriment.

He is more honest than most politicians who tend to do most of their lying by omission.

So according to you (and Melty) Trump lies a lot but he’s refreshingly honest, he says a lot of stupid shit but he’s mostly right, he’s a dude but you’d fuck him anyway.

You seem a little confused. Do you even know what day it is?

Jsc810 wrote:Oh great. Not only did Trump property hire illegal immigrants, they also provided fake green cards and fake social security cards to them.

Fuck Trump and fuck every single person who continues to support the criminal.

It must really suck every day to think that Hillary lost to the worst President ever. Then add to it your failed predictions.

Left Seater wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Oh great. Not only did Trump property hire illegal immigrants, they also provided fake green cards and fake social security cards to them.

Fuck Trump and fuck every single person who continues to support the criminal.

It must really suck every day to think that Hillary lost to the worst President ever. Then add to it your failed predictions.

No, it sucks that Trump and the Republican leadership allowed a foreign country to interfere with our election.

88 wrote:The thing we must not do is actually find out what in fact occurred before we go completely apeshit about something that may or may not involve Trump. Never waste an opportunity to scream and cry and tell each other that the world will be better when the bad man is gone. Bleat on.

I already know enough about him to know you are fucking POS for voting for him. In fact I knew enough about him in 1982 to know that anyone who backed him was a stupid fuckhole.

Left Seater wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Oh great. Not only did Trump property hire illegal immigrants, they also provided fake green cards and fake social security cards to them.

Fuck Trump and fuck every single person who continues to support the criminal.

It must really suck every day to think that Hillary lost to the worst President ever. Then add to it your failed predictions.

It must suck to be such a POS that ^that seemed like a good post to mash out.

Lefty (and millions of other clueless mouthbreathers) were conned by the flimflam artist, so now he rolls in and tries to turn that back on Hillary.

I didn't say he allowed it. He actively participated in the collusion.

Kierland wrote: It must suck to be such a POS that ^that seemed like a good post to mash out.

I haven't seen this much midget rage since The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies


:|

Hey midget, keep biting those ankles.

Softball, did the Don pass a tax cut? Yes. Win for me. Don’t care much for the rest of it, but #winning.

Left Seater wrote:Hey midget, keep biting those ankles.

Softball, did the Don pass a tax cut? Yes. Win for me. Don’t care much for the rest of it, but #winning.

What does that even mean? You had a post, I responded. It’s a message board. That’s how they work.
Oh and nice white flag.

Papa Willie wrote:

Diego in Seattle wrote:I didn't say he allowed it. He actively participated in the collusion.

So you were there? If he did, it happened under your God's watch. How did you God allow that to happen?

There is no "God." There's only....

Left Seater wrote:Softball, did the Don pass a tax cut? Yes. Win for me. Don’t care much for the rest of it, but #winning.

Lefty, I am all for tax cuts.

But unfortunately those tax cuts must be met with spending cuts -- which we have not seen.

Don is every bit as drunk on spending as Barry was.

He is completely out of control.


If Don was a real president he would have assumed office and then taken steps to help the economy.

Instead, he perpetuated the problem -- while continually pimping his greatness as far as the economy and markets are concerned.

It is completely ridiculous.

He is either mentally ill or he is not a real president.

It is both, really.

We are 21 trillion in debt and we are fucked.


You can pacify yourself with your little tax cut, but it has been put on the credit card of your posterity.

That's some sick shit right there.

Let’s see what this new House of Reps puts forward for spending. My guess is it will be more of the same. But I doubt we see the same energy or passion on calling them out as you have with Don.

Lefty, everyone knows what the DIms do.

Big fed gov, more spending, more entitlements, etc.


Don regularly ripped on Barry and the DIms for their reckless economic practices.
He sold himself as the outsider who was against all of that.

Then he gets in there and he proceeds to run up MASSIVE deficits.

That's is part of why I shred him.


He is an extremely low character con man.
A fraud.
He is giving the conservative cause a big black eye.

When he implodes, it is going to be as if conservatism implodes -- because the overall media is going to tie conservatism right to Don's hip.
Conservatism and Donald Trump will sink together.


Wakey.

Softball Bat wrote:But unfortunately those tax cuts must be met with spending cuts -- which we have not seen.

Agree with the spending cuts, but why no mention of the record collection of federal income taxes?

Probably because a year in which collection of federal income taxes isn't a record is an anomaly, halfwit.

https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s- ... ue-3305762

A flat earther says what?

From your article:

U.S. Tax Revenue by Year
Here's a record of income for each fiscal year since 1960. There are links to more details about the revenue back to the FY 2006 budget. Tax receipts fell off during the recession but started setting new records by FY 2013.

FY 2019 - $3.422 trillion, estimated.
FY 2018 - $3.34 trillion, estimated.
FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.
FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.
FY 2011 - $2.30 trillion.
FY 2010 - $2.16 trillion.
FY 2009 - $2.10 trillion.

1960 to 2019.

Look at the chart, tardlette.

Yearly tax revenue set a new record in 52 out of 59 years.


Don's cum has seeped its way into your brain.

sirfindatake isn’t very good with numbers.

Sin
MA

Softball Bat wrote: He is giving the conservative cause a big black eye.

When he implodes, it is going to be as if conservatism implodes -- because the overall media is going to tie conservatism right to Don's hip.
Conservatism and Donald Trump will sink together.

Conservatism?

Hey, Tart Van Winkle...we're on the doorstep of 2019. Where did you get the impression that Trump and the momentum behind Trump had anything to do with "conservatism".
You and 'Spray are still fighting the liberal/conservative "culture war" that went out with dial-up internet and Blockbuster rentals. Update your playbook, bro.

Don has sold himself as a conservative.





https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/trump ... 7899075969

There is nothing conservative about Trump or his profligate spending.

Left Seater wrote:Let’s see what this new House of Reps puts forward for spending. My guess is it will be more of the same. But I doubt we see the same energy or passion on calling them out as you have with Don.

Wave more white flags and suck more red dicks. Pathetic POS.

So now softball you think Don can bring down a whole political philosophy? That is almost as funny as your flat earth trolling. Remember what JSC tried to sell us when Hillary ran for President?

Midget must be angry he didn’t repeat as BB. So angry.

BSmack wrote:There is nothing conservative about Trump or his profligate spending.

So are you claiming him for your side?

Smackie Chan wrote: So are you claiming him for your side?

Who's side?