Trump 2.0

billvon said:
Right. But in both areas, illegal immigrants commit less crimes than US citizens. Sure, if you have to add 100,000 people to a city, and even one of them commits a crime, then absolute crime will go up, even if crimes per 100,000 goes way down.

But overall, if you are going to get another 100,000 people into your area, you are MUCH MUCH better off with immigrants (illegal or legal) than with US citizens. Lower crime, higher productivity, more innovation, and greater economic growth.


Click to expand...
The discussion is generally about not suddenly adding 100,000 people. It's also a bit of semantics. If you are talking about 100,000 new babies from upper middle class households, when they grow up, crime won't increase.

If you are talking about second generations from working class immigrants from the inner cities, crime may go up even though they aren't immigrants statistically speaking at that point. It's just being a little disingenuous to trot out that line over and over when we know the reality on the ground.
 
Sarkus said:
As said, there are arguments for and against, and, as you say, it can be different for different places.

My main point was really that the poster is simply regurgitating MAGA rhetoric without any support whatsoever, treating the issue as a whole. And as such countering with actual facts (for we should not let them pesky things get in the way) regarding the whole is appropriate.
So we start by countering the claims of the general with facts regarding the general.

And when you do get to the more specific locales, I'd still be curious as to where the evidence is for the "mass savage barbarian invasion bringing in mass crimes and criminal terrorism to America, ever known in American history."
Can you provide anything to support this claim by our new poster even at a local level? Don't be afraid to call bullshit for what it is, even if it does come from your side of the aisle, so to speak. ;) But if there is evidence, then I'd genuinely like to understand it.
Click to expand...
I don't have an aisle and yes, that's BS of course as is most of what Trump says. That's why I don't defend any of that.
 
Seattle said:
The discussion is generally about not suddenly adding 100,000 people. It's also a bit of semantics. If you are talking about 100,000 new babies from upper middle class households, when they grow up, crime won't increase.
Click to expand...
Agreed, if you look forward 20 years.

But in the next few years, if you want _average_ crime to decrease in your area (and improve the economy, increase tax income etc) adding immigrants will do it.

It's just being a little disingenuous to trot out that line over and over when we know the reality on the ground.
Click to expand...

The reality on the ground is that more immigrants (compared to more citizens) equals less crime. Even if it's counterintuitive, and it seems like immigrants are the problem.
 
billvon said:
Agreed, if you look forward 20 years.

But in the next few years, if you want _average_ crime to decrease in your area (and improve the economy, increase tax income etc) adding immigrants will do it.



The reality on the ground is that more immigrants (compared to more citizens) equals less crime. Even if it's counterintuitive, and it seems like immigrants are the problem.
Click to expand...
It's not "counterintuitive". My intuition wouldn't tell me that hard working Mexicans coming here for a better life would commit more crimes.

The problem is that there is too little screening. The Mexican and El Salvadoran gang members that come here do commit crimes. I'm not arguing for Trump's approach. I am what should be obvious however.
 
Seattle said:
It's not "counterintuitive". My intuition wouldn't tell me that hard working Mexicans coming here for a better life would commit more crimes.
Click to expand...
Great.

The problem is that there is too little screening.
Click to expand...

OK. The pretty clear answer to that problem is to do more screening. Unfortunately, the lawyers/judges/courtrooms/investigators that do such screening have been the #1 target of republican "cost reduction" efforts. The rhetoric is usually "spend money on veterans before spending it on illegal aliens!"

So we may have to wait four years before we make any progress on that front.
 
billvon said:
Great.



OK. The pretty clear answer to that problem is to do more screening. Unfortunately, the lawyers/judges/courtrooms/investigators that do such screening have been the #1 target of republican "cost reduction" efforts. The rhetoric is usually "spend money on veterans before spending it on illegal aliens!"

So we may have to wait four years before we make any progress on that front.
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with my comments. That's just bringing up another problem that fits into your narrative regarding Trump. Great. That's has nothing to do with any of my comments.
 
Seattle said:
That has nothing to do with my comments.
Click to expand...
To recap:

You posted that the problem is that there is too little screening.
I replied that yes, it is a problem, and suggested a solution.

You believe that that reply has nothing to do with your comments.

OK then.
 
billvon said:
To recap:

You posted that the problem is that there is too little screening.
I replied that yes, it is a problem, and suggested a solution.

You believe that that reply has nothing to do with your comments.

OK then.
Click to expand...
Trump just got into office. Screening has been an issue long before that.
 
Seattle said:
The problem with this argument is that it misses the point. Two things can be true at once. It doesn't really matter if most immigrants don't commit crimes if you (for example) live in a border area and most of your crime is immigrant related or if you live in a area that was low crime far from a border area and now crime has gone up with much of it immigrant related.
Click to expand...
Thing is, I can't seem to find much information that supports this idea that there might be border-adjacent places where crime has increased and much of it is due to immigrants. In fact, even sources like the Cato Institute--a very rightwing organization--seem to debunk this.

I mean, as population in an area increases, crime is likely to increase. Crime rates are likely to remain the same, and there is no indication that the increased crime (in numbers) in such places is more due to immigrants.

You're talking hypotheticals. If you want to make a case, show some data and evidence.
 

The Rapist: I mean, I'll tell you a story. A friend of mine who's a businessman, very, very, very top guy. Most of you would've heard of him. A highly neurotic, brilliant businessman. Seriously overweight, and he takes the fat shot drug. And he called me up and he said, "President…," he calls me. He used to call me Donald. Now he calls me President, so that's nice respect. But he's a rough guy, smart guy, very successful, very rich. I wouldn't even know how we would know this, but because he's got comments, "President, could I ask you a question?"

"What?"

"I'm in London, and I just paid for this damn fat drug I take." I said, "It's not working." He said, "I just paid $88, and in New York I paid $1,300. What the hell is going on?" He said, "So I checked, and it's the same box made in the same plant by the same company. It's the identical pill that I buy in New York, and here I'm paying $88 in London. In New York, I'm paying $1,300." Now, this is a great businessman, but he's not familiar with this crazy situation that we have. But he was stunned, but it was just one of those stories.
----

What the fuck? Does the guy take the "fat drug shot" or does he take a pill? The Rapist tells his "friend" that the "(drug's) not working." What a fucking asshole. And how is he "not familiar with this crazy situation that we have"? I thought he was brilliant, and a very, very, very top guy. Sounds like another dumbass to me.

I was thinking that Tony Hinchcliffe had said "kill yourself" to a comic before, but it turns out that that line only appears in Tim Heidecker's parody of Tony Hinchcliffe, so I guess I can't really use that here. But in my "research" (on the Hinchcliffe matter), I did learn this from AI:
It appears you're asking about Tony Hinchcliffe and whether he's made jokes or statements that could be interpreted as telling someone to "kill yourself".

there is no specific evidence of Hinchcliffe directly saying "kill yourself" in his comedy or public statements, keep in mind:
  • Hinchcliffe's Comedy Style: He is known for dark, edgy, and often offensive humor. His stand-up and roast battles frequently push boundaries and make controversial statements.
  • Context Matters: It is crucial to consider the context of any joke or statement within the realm of comedy. What might be deemed offensive in one context can be intended as satire or hyperbole in another.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm. "Context matters." What does that mean?
 
Last edited:
Seattle said:
Trump just got into office. Screening has been an issue long before that.
Click to expand...

And Democrats have been begging for a chance to compromise with Republicans and pass a shitty GOP border bill for over seventeen years, now. The problem is, Republicans can't seem to come up with a bill racist enough to satisfy Republicans.

I know, I know: Conservatives, they can't help themselves.

And now the Afrikaner stunt. At this point there's no denying Republican Party durability is about supremacism. And, honestly, we can only wonder at middle-road idiots who spent the last decade trying to pretend otherwise.

No, we don't really wonder. They're just a bunch of fucking racists.

• • •​

Fourth-wall note: Seriously, it's like, if at some point they had woken up and faced the possibility that they might be wrong, then, sure, maybe they could even tell us something important like what went wrong, and how they fell down which hole. But, no, the best they can do is stumble along and pretend to be horrified by the inevitability of what they saw fit to defend against the unfairness of being criticized. There really isn't any point in banging on the notas; they're too stupid to understand the sarcasm: We know they're not really notasupremacist. We get that they're a bunch of shameless, lying supremacists.

Consider the argument before us: "Trump just got into office. Screening has been an issue long before that." If they're that easily fooled, why? At some point, it's easier to accept they're probably not fooled.
 
Last edited:
Tiassa said:
No, we don't really wonder. They're just a bunch of fucking racists.
Click to expand...
And to be clear, they're a bunch of fucking racists who will--and do--think nothing when it comes to killing those they despise--see Gaza, disappearing people to gulags and concentration camps, denying essential healthcare, etc. (And a note for whatever idjits happen to be reading: just cuz they're Zionists and support Israel doesn't mean they're not antisemites, as well.)

I will add here, cuz why not?, that maybe people should think about this next time they consider whining about someone saying that people who are willingly and knowingly a danger and existential threat to others (and with no likelihood for rehabilitation) need to be dead. You may not agree with such a sentiment, but it really ain't all that radical either. (Though, given that these people are a bunch of semi-literate fucking snowflakes, perhaps it would be wise to avoid words like "guns", for instance, which are triggering to these people, when expressing such a senitment.)
 
sculptor said:
When I read much of what is posted herein
I think TDS seems to be the norm
Click to expand...
Do you live in rural America, perhaps in a red state? The new bill being introduced by Republicans will slash at least $800 Billion from Medicaid. What does this mean to you? Your local hospital will close down and so will the one in the next county over. Employees working at the hospital will be forced to move elsewhere and within a short time, the local town will become a ghost town as businesses fail and people move on as a result.

Still too much TDS for you?
 
(Q) said:
Do you live in rural America, perhaps in a red state? The new bill being introduced by Republicans will slash at least $800 Billion from Medicaid. What does this mean to you? Your local hospital will close down and so will the one in the next county over. Employees working at the hospital will be forced to move elsewhere and within a short time, the local town will become a ghost town as businesses fail and people move on as a result.

Still too much TDS for you?
Click to expand...
You will be very angry when that doesn't happen, won't you?! It'll drive you absolutely nuts, and maybe even into terrorist mode, like your radical fanatical friends.
 
Atlan0001 said:
You will be very angry when that doesn't happen, won't you?!
Click to expand...
If the bill gets passed, which it most likely will, then yes, it will happen. I would not be happy if it did happen. No one would, unless you're an idiot. Duh.
Atlan0001 said:
It'll drive you absolutely nuts, and maybe even into terrorist mode, like your radical fanatical friends.
Click to expand...
I don't belong to Maga, so I have no radical fanatical friends.
 
Atlan0001 said:
You will be very angry when that doesn't happen, won't you?! It'll drive you absolutely nuts, and maybe even into terrorist mode, like your radical fanatical friends.
Click to expand...
Can you provide some real examples here, not just fabulated bullshit you pulled out of your ass?
 
Sarkus said:
Just to add regarding the "flying palace" (reports I've seen vary its value from between $200-400m), the DoJ think it entirely okay for the President to transfer such assets to his Presidential Library Foundation at the end of term (well, being his DoJ with zero impartiality, well, dur!) while Ranking Democrat in the House Jamie Raskin has had to remind the DoJ that the Constitution is quite clear on the matter: any transfer of any gift would require approval of Congress. That's if the Constitution is still in play by then. Also, by the time the plane will be transferred, it's likely/possible that the Democrats will own the House.

So more fun times.
Click to expand...
I was amused to see Marina Hyde in the Guardian has dubbed this plane the "griftliner". I quite like that. :)
 
Atlan0001 said:
You will be very angry when that doesn't happen, won't you?! It'll drive you absolutely nuts, and maybe even into terrorist mode, like your radical fanatical friends.
Click to expand...
Oh, I think most of the terrorists lately have been on your side. Murderous terrorist (and fervent Trump supporter) Patrick Crusius pled guilty to murdering 23 people and wounding 22 others in 2019, for example. His lawyer explained that "he thought he had to stop the invasion because that’s what his president was telling him."

The Jan 6th terrorists who tried to kill cops, and succeeded in gouging at least one cop's eye out. And that Trump pardoned.

In 2016 in Gainesville, FL a Trump supporter terrorist punched a Latino storekeeper in the head, yelling "This is for Trump!"

In Washington in 2017 a local terrorist threatened to kill a Syrian neighbor. When police responded to the threat, the man said he wanted the Syrian to "get out of my country," then said "That’s why I like Trump" - implying Trump would be OK with it, so the police should be, too.

In 2016, three terrorists were plotting to bomb a mostly Muslim apartment complex in Garden City, KS. Fortunately they were caught before they could set off the bombs. According to the lawyer, the terrorists "were concerned about what now-President Trump had to say about the concept of Islamic terrorism."

In 2015, a Boston terrorist (Steven Leader) beat a sleeping homeless Mexican with a metal pole. He told police "Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported." The victim was a US citizen.

In 2018, Florida terrorist Cesar Sayoc mailed 15 package bombs to critics of Trump. At the time he was living in a van covered with pro-Trump stickers. Fortunately none of the bombs went off. He is now serving 20 years in jail for attempted murder.

In 2018, sex offender Bruce M. Alexander of Tampa, Florida grabbed a woman by the crotch on a Southwest Airlines flight. When he was arrested, he "stated that the President of the United States says it’s ok to grab women by their private parts."

There have been literally dozens of these cases.

So why don't you and your fellow terrorists/sex offenders get the plank out of your own eye first?
 
(Q) said:
Do you live in rural America, perhaps in a red state? The new bill being introduced by Republicans will slash at least $800 Billion from Medicaid. What does this mean to you? Your local hospital will close down and so will the one in the next county over. Employees working at the hospital will be forced to move elsewhere and within a short time, the local town will become a ghost town as businesses fail and people move on as a result.
Click to expand...
Hey, as long as it hurts one immigrant, it's all worth it to them.
 
What we're witnessing is obscenity, indecency, acts of corruption and taking entitlement fueled by arrogance that is without any precedent in the entire 250 year history of America. There is no comparable period of corruption, there is no similar era of taking government gangsterism, government banditry on the wildest of wild west main streets. Has there been anything approaching the rampant illegality and unconstitutional arrogance of this crooked administration. There are no words.

The Saudis will ply Trump with diamonds and gold and watches and all manner of tokens that are meaningless to the people that control the worlds oil supplies. What they want and what they'll buy at any cost is America's weapons. Trump has come hat in hand like a beggar on his knees, an American president, a supplicant detached from the dignity of his office, a whore in a brothel servicing his Arab masters.

Never mind 15 of the 19 hijackers who attacked on 911 came from Saudi Arabia, never mind the Washington Post reporter dismembered on the orders of the crown prince, there is business to be done, there is gold in that desert sand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top