Only Two Percent of Americans Who Voted for Trump Regret It

[Mr&Mrs G. 903]

8 minutes ago, Transborderwife said:

There's several people advising him to keep DACA or in favor of it.

You mean within the Republican party and thats why he has not got rid of it as yet? 

[IAMX 3,055]

27 minutes ago, Mr&Mrs G. said:

You mean within the Republican party and thats why he has not got rid of it as yet? 

Yep. However, he is the leader of the very departments in question so had he issued the order, which he hasn't, makes no sense for them not to comply.

 

Trump has certainly battled the establishment elements within the GOP, very similar establishment that encompasses the MSM and Democratic Party.

[Mr&Mrs G. 903]

2 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Yep. However, he is the leader of the very departments in question so had he issued the order, which he hasn't, makes no sense for them not to comply.

 

Trump has certainly battled the establishment elements within the GOP, very similar establishment that encompasses the MSM and Democratic Party.

Appreciate the explanation. 

 

This part of the forum should almost be recommended reading for future immigrants. Most of us will already have political leanings before we arrive but it does no harm to get involved in the US discussion before we get off the plane. 

[IAMX 3,055]

10 minutes ago, Mr&Mrs G. said:

Appreciate the explanation. 

 

This part of the forum should almost be recommended reading for future immigrants. Most of us will already have political leanings before we arrive but it does no harm to get involved in the US discussion before we get off the plane. 

I've tried to make my wife read these forums but she has no interest.

The smarter half as ever.

Edited April 23, 2017 by IAMX

[Transborderwife 4,666]

37 minutes ago, IAMX said:

I've tried to make my wife read these forums but she has no interest.

The smarter half as ever.

I'm the foreigner and my American half isn't a big politics dude

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

4 hours ago, IAMX said:

Similar bans have been enacted, only now have judges had an issue with it, but it's the 9th so.. hope it sees its day in SCOTUS.

Judges only have issues when they are brought cases...what cases have slipped through in the past and why do these judges have it in for him?

[OriZ 3,157]

6 hours ago, ccneat said:

Two Percent

President Donald Trump is getting ready to mark his 100 days in office as the least popular commander in chief of the modern era at this point in their presidency. But among his supporters, there are no regrets as 96 percent of those who voted for Trump said they would do it all over again if the election were held today, according to the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll. In contrast, 85 percent of Americans who voted for Hillary Clinton said they’d vote for her if the election were held today. That’s not because Clinton voters would support Trump, but rather because they say they’d be more willing to back a third party candidate or not vote at all.

The poll makes clear what numerous surveys have already pointed out: Trump has not enjoyed the typical 100-day honeymoon period. Overall, only 42 percent of Americans approve of Trump’s performance as president and 53 percent disapprove. The number is worse in the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll that puts Trump’s overall job-approval rating at 40 percent, four points lower than it was in February. That is in sharp contrast to the average 69 percent approval for past presidents at or near the 100-day mark. President Barack Obama, for example, had a 69-26 percent approval rating near his 100 days in office.

More than half of Americans don’t think Trump has accomplished much in his first 100 days. Forty-five percent of Americans flat out say that Trump’s presidency is off to a poor start while 19 percent say it’s been “only a fair start.” That compares to the 35 perent who say the president’s first 100 days have been “good” or “great,” according to the NBC/WSJ poll.

That doesn’t mean it’s all doom and gloom for the president. The Post/ABC poll also finds some surprisingly positive evaluations of the commander in chief’s performance on certain issues. More than half of Americans—53 percent—say Trump is a strong leader, including 25 percent of Democrats. Plus 73 percent of Americans approve of the way he has been pressuring companies to keep jobs in the country. A plurality—46 percent—also approve of the way he has been handling North Korea. The president also gets high marks for his recent military actions in Syria, which 62 percent of Americans say they support, according to the NBC/WSJ poll.

Still, despite these few bright spots, the polls point to mostly bad news for the president as 56 percent say he doesn’t have the judgment to serve effectively as president and 58 percent doubt his honesty and trustworthiness. The public also seems to have noticed Trump’s penchant for changing his mind, with 55 percent saying he doesn’t follow a consistent set of principles.

Democrats should be cautious about getting too gleeful about Trump’s numbers though as 67 percent say the Democratic Party is out of touch with the concerns of most Americans, according to the Post/ABC survey. Both Trump and the Republican Party have better scores in that regard with 58 percent and 62 percent, respectively.

 

 

For me the takeaway would be this.

 

4 hours ago, IAMX said:

Yeah, it's a directive he can change with the swipe of a pen. Of all the things, this one makes the least amount of sense.

Question: Why would you want someone who was brought here as a child and did nothing wrong to be kicked out of the only place they ever knew?

 

3 hours ago, Mr&Mrs G. said:

Not sure how I even ended up on the website but this is from Berkeley.

 

"Please note DACA is discretionary, and thus this program may be discontinued under the Trump Administration at any time. Individuals with DACA may lose work authorization or may not be allowed to renew their work authorization. If this happens, we will work with students to brainstorm creative strategies with regards to both legal status and work authorization.

Do not apply for an initial or DACA renewal if you have a recent criminal history, as this may make you a priority for removal and provide the government with the information it needs to deport you. Consult with the USP attorney in such cases as we may be able to get post-conviction relief in your case."

 

 

So they believe Trump can get rid of DACA, also good to see them giving those with a recent criminal history a heads up not to apply. The US needs to keep all these criminals so let's help them stay. 

...andddd on the other hand...this is wrong as well. Being in the MOR is fun.

 

1 hour ago, Transborderwife said:

I'm the foreigner and my American half isn't a big politics dude

It does seem like most people here are the USCs with just you, me and a few others being the foreigners. I always found that to be interesting. My wife doesn't do forums like these and as I've mentioned before she didn't even do the paperwork - I did it she signed it lol

[Inikamoze 86]

4 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

It does seem like most people here are the USCs with just you, me and a few others being the foreigners. I always found that to be interesting. My wife doesn't do forums like these and as I've mentioned before she didn't even do the paperwork - I did it she signed it lol

I've never really paid attention to the make up of the forum and sometimes can't tell either way who's the USC. my other half doesn't do forums either of any sort!

As for the paperwork it was 100% down to me to complete. Both here in the US and when we were in Europe!

Edited April 23, 2017 by Inikamoze

[OriZ 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Inikamoze said:

I've never really paid attention to the make up of the forum and sometimes can't tell either way who's the USC. my other half doesn't do forums either of any sort!

As for the paperwork it was 100% down to me to complete. Both here in the US and when we were in Europe!

Yeah can't say it was fun for me and it was definitely time consuming, but she knew it would be even less fun for her(she can't stand paperwork) and how meticulous I am so she left it for me. I actually "got paid" for doing it because I was working in a company in Israel at the time where I could come in pretty much whenever I wanted to, so I would come in at night when there would be hardly no one else there and do it there, use the computer there, printer etc. Still got my job done and got paid to be there to do my own paperwork

 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

Question: Why would you want someone who was brought here as a child and did nothing wrong to be kicked out of the only place they ever knew?

Their entire presence is due to breaking the law. It is an affront to those whose parents go through a legal process to ensure their children likewise are recognized as legal immigrants.

 

Why should they be given special treatment over other children just because their parents broke the law? If the parents were denied their app the children would likewise be denied.

 

Sends all the wrong messages about following laws and customs of another country.

[OriZ 3,157]

55 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Their entire presence is due to breaking the law. It is an affront to those whose parents go through a legal process to ensure their children likewise are recognized as legal immigrants.

 

Why should they be given special treatment over other children just because their parents broke the law? If the parents were denied their app the children would likewise be denied.

 

Sends all the wrong messages about following laws and customs of another country.

The problem for me is they've already been here, sometimes for decades. I agree what the parents did is wrong, and in that case something should be done about it immediately. However if the kids have already spent many years here, some married, have kids, husbands, wives...a job, etc. I think it serves as a statute of limitations of sort, or should anyway. You can't ruin someone else's life on a whim because of their parents doing something wrong many years ago. You either take care of it at the time or you leave it alone.

[IAMX 3,055]

2 hours ago, OriZ said:

The problem for me is they've already been here, sometimes for decades. I agree what the parents did is wrong, and in that case something should be done about it immediately. However if the kids have already spent many years here, some married, have kids, husbands, wives...a job, etc. I think it serves as a statute of limitations of sort, or should anyway. You can't ruin someone else's life on a whim because of their parents doing something wrong many years ago. You either take care of it at the time or you leave it alone.

The punishment this dishes out to people who came legally to me isn't worth it.

 

1) They drain local economies, especially in states like California, compound this problem by sending their illegal kids to schools, getting on lunch programs, going to hospitals, etc., those who are trying to get local medicare effectively get pushed off it 

2) The idea of giving amnesty to kids because "they're kids", or the presumption that they live great productive lives is nice and all, but it punishes those who immigrate legally and put them on the same status

 

If there wasn't such an enormous effort by the pro-illegal left trying to interfere with the law, via sanctuary cities, bullying people regarding initiatives/amendments, willing to screw everyone else for illegals (even ones that come and commit violent crimes, they still get better treatment), and huge NPO's dedicated to helping illegals skirt immigrant law (including churches such as the Catholic dioceses) or going so far as to hide them , and so on, I'd probably be more willing to budge. But given Americans already pay a huge penalty for mostly awful enforcement of immigrant law, I see no reason to.

Edited April 24, 2017 by IAMX

[eieio 1,594]

If Trump appoints Clinton to his cabinet....then I might regret voting for him.

 

Interesting that many times more people regret voting for hillary. Seems like people are waking up.

[OriZ 3,157]

7 hours ago, IAMX said:

The punishment this dishes out to people who came legally to me isn't worth it.

 

1) They drain local economies, especially in states like California, compound this problem by sending their illegal kids to schools, getting on lunch programs, going to hospitals, etc., those who are trying to get local medicare effectively get pushed off it 

2) The idea of giving amnesty to kids because "they're kids", or the presumption that they live great productive lives is nice and all, but it punishes those who immigrate legally and put them on the same status

 

If there wasn't such an enormous effort by the pro-illegal left trying to interfere with the law, via sanctuary cities, bullying people regarding initiatives/amendments, willing to screw everyone else for illegals (even ones that come and commit violent crimes, they still get better treatment), and huge NPO's dedicated to helping illegals skirt immigrant law (including churches such as the Catholic dioceses) or going so far as to hide them , and so on, I'd probably be more willing to budge. But given Americans already pay a huge penalty for mostly awful enforcement of immigrant law, I see no reason to.

I agree with some of what you're saying, I support enforcing a strong border and deporting any illegals who have committed crimes. I just have an issue with deporting people who haven't committed any crimes who did not get to make their own conscious decision to come to the US illegally, many years after the fact, after they've built a life here. I think it's inhumane to tear somebody's life apart for something they didn't do wrong. Not to mention the fact that sometimes you do end up deporting productive people who actually contributed, not only welfare cases. In either case, I think it's on us if we fail to prevent their parents from coming in or deporting them in a timely manner, 

[Transborderwife 4,666]

19 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I agree with some of what you're saying, I support enforcing a strong border and deporting any illegals who have committed crimes. I just have an issue with deporting people who haven't committed any crimes who did not get to make their own conscious decision to come to the US illegally, many years after the fact, after they've built a life here. I think it's inhumane to tear somebody's life apart for something they didn't do wrong. Not to mention the fact that sometimes you do end up deporting productive people who actually contributed, not only welfare cases. In either case, I think it's on us if we fail to prevent their parents from coming in or deporting them in a timely manner, 

My opinion exactly