Trump's future immigration policies- speculation MEGATHREAD

[sarahandyunus 133]

It is a blanket ban because they outright banned people who have a right to be in the country before even deciding what sort of new policy would be in place.

 

Trump has no idea what he's doing. 

[FloridaMinsk 88]

1 minute ago, Suss&Camm said:

Ofc... smh... can't possibly be that they see smth wrong with it.

 

There has been history of companies being attacked for not falling in line.   

 

Hobby Lobby for example. 

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

 

2 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

There has been history of companies being attacked for not falling in line.   

 

Hobby Lobby for example. 

No one has attacked these companies. They have put out statements out of their own free will. There is also history of this happening on occasion.

Edited January 30, 2017 by Suss&Camm

[FloridaMinsk 88]

4 minutes ago, sarahandyunus said:

Super worried at this point that Turkey will be added to the ban list :'(

 

I have wondered this as well.   Not sure why but My gut feeling is they won't be on the list.    

 

At least I hope, one of my best mates is from turkey and his sisters visit often.   But even if they are added if there isn't a concern then it will just be more hassle at the border.    

 

Hopefully it all works out and turkey is kept off the list.   

[FloridaMinsk 88]

3 minutes ago, Suss&Camm said:

 

No one has attacked these companies. They have put out statements out of their own free will. There is also history of this happening on occasion.

 

What?  Are you making a joke?   

 

Google Hobby Lobby attacked for beliefs 

 

uber was attacked this weekend and they were against the policy.   They were attacked because they took a meeting with trump to have an open dialogue.  

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

What?  Are you making a joke?   

 

Google Hobby Lobby attacked for beliefs 

 

uber was attacked this weekend and they were against the policy.   They were attacked because they took a meeting with trump to have an open dialogue.  

I was referring to the companies opposing this ban.

[FloridaMinsk 88]

7 minutes ago, sarahandyunus said:

It is a blanket ban because they outright banned people who have a right to be in the country before even deciding what sort of new policy would be in place.

 

Trump has no idea what he's doing. 

 

The definition of an outright ban is forever.   The fact it ends between 30-120 days shows it's not a ban.  

 

Its more of a suspension if we are being honest. 

[KierenHby 899]

 

Quote

I am not going to get into a pissing match over how you are incorrectly using basic terminology.   But you are.. going on and on! 

 

Trump won because he wanted strong borders.   And he was the only candidate taking a hard stance. Trump won because of those things, but he also won because he traffics is fear; fear IS his currency!! He never fully repudiated the white nationalistic movement. However, there are many aspects to Trump that found favor with the general populace. 

 

He lost the popular vote because he spent half the money on his campaign that hillary did and never went to California.   She won California by 4 million votes.  Her margin on pop vote was 3.   Which democrats win all the time.... because of California.  Doesn't matter. Trump lost the popular vote. His supporters should accept that! Just as much as he is the rightfully elected president due to the win in the Electoral College. 

 

I care about my country having laws, a sensible and to our advantage immigration policy.   I want to take in smaller numbers to ensure full assimilation. Most here care about their country having and enforcing laws. 

 

 

[FloridaMinsk 88]

1 minute ago, Suss&Camm said:

I was referring to the companies opposing this ban.

 

Yes and my point being that those opposing are doing so to avoid being hit with negative leftist attacks.  Since they use the media to hurt companies who don't fall in line.   

 

So do they actually believe it or do they just say so while having a gun to their head? 

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Yes and my point being that those opposing are doing so to avoid being hit with negative leftist attacks.  Since they use the media to hurt companies who don't fall in line.   

 

So do they actually believe it or do they just say so while having a gun to their head? 

You believe that what they put out as statements are lies. While Everything and anything put out by the Trump administration is the truth so help me God. I got it. I already know this is your belief. I was providing information, would you please stop telling people how to interpret it. You are not the holder of all truth. I disagree that they were coerced to put forward those statements. Your opinion is opposite. You and I will likely not gain anything by keeping this discussion going, which is why I am yet again not going to continue this discussion with you. 

[FloridaMinsk 88]

1 hour ago, Suss&Camm said:

You believe that what they put out as statements are lies. While Everything and anything put out by the Trump administration is the truth so help me God. I got it. I already know this is your belief. I was providing information, would you please stop telling people how to interpret it. You are not the holder of all truth. I disagree that they were coerced to put forward those statements. Your opinion is opposite. You and I will likely not gain anything by keeping this discussion going, which is why I am yet again not going to continue this discussion with you. 

I never said the statements were lies.   

 

I just said there there is a track record of companies being forced into a line of thought due to leftist pressures.    

 

We truly don't know  if it's a real belief or if they are avoiding bad press.   

 

Thats all I have said on this topic.  

 

As for you and I .....  we can always agree to disagree.    There is no reason for hard feelings or frustration.  

 

For me the annoying part of this issue and others similar is the paranoia from people when it's clearly not warranted if we are being honest brokers.   

[Dutchster 1,107]

"Trump won because he wanted strong borders and he was the only candidate taking a hard stance ." Trump won because of the electoral system but that's about it. If electoral was not counting, Hillary would have won by popular vote.

[Dutchster 1,107]

I do have a feeling it's just this ban and some adjustments to certain visas. Couldn't imagine he'd close borders for all those millions of tourists who spend money in the US like crazy. But then again, this is Trump and who knows with his borderline.

[cyclone27 710]

7 minutes ago, Dutchster said:

"Trump won because he wanted strong borders and he was the only candidate taking a hard stance ." Trump won because of the electoral system but that's about it. If electoral was not counting, Hillary would have won by popular vote.

Pres Trump won because he won the majority of the popular votes in each individual state.  This is the US system it's not a direct national popular vote so it's quite irrelevant and pointless to keep if-ing. 

[N-o-l-a 7,168]

33 minutes ago, Dutchster said:

"Trump won because he wanted strong borders and he was the only candidate taking a hard stance ." Trump won because of the electoral system but that's about it. If electoral was not counting, Hillary would have won by popular vote.

 

Well, then, he won the majority of the electoral vote because people supported him.  Immigration is a big issue for a lot of people in this country and according to this the majority support this type of ban.  http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/29/poll-nearly-half-america-voters-support-trumps-immigration-order

I'm not going to debate the validity of a Quinnipiac poll, which I think should hold, but you might want to start thinking that the majority of Americans might think things that they are too scared to publicly voice because they might get charged by a SJW.