House Passes Bill To Avoid Government Shutdown

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 hours ago, bcking said:

His exact quote was:

 

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” he said in the same speech. “They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

 

It is implied that he thinks that at least the majority of the people "Mexico is sending" (does he think the government is sending us people?) are criminals or rapists. Some, "he assumes" are good. The way he says it makes it pretty clear that he thinks at least a majority (but not all) are bad. The word some, when applied to the "good people" also implies a minority for that group.

 

Of course there are rapist and criminals coming from Mexico, and I'm sure everyone here would like to see those people stay out. But Trump didn't say that Mexico was sending good people, though some are rapists/criminals. He said they are bad, but "some" are good. His implication was quite clear.

Try that again, but with THEIR rapists.  

 

As in:

they’re bringing drugs

they're bringing crime

they're bringing rapists

 

that was what he said.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Her legs are right?  Wth 

He blew right PAST obsession and went for her legs.  Couldn’t find anything in the TOS against it, so didn’t feel the need to report it.

Edited January 24, 2018 by IDWAF

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Just now, IDWAF said:

He blew right PAST obsession and went for her legs.  Couldn’t find anything in the TOS against it, so didn’t feel,the need to, report it.

Take another look to be sure. Does not sound family friendly

[bcking 3,157]

6 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Try that again, but with THEIR rapists.  

 

As in:

they’re bringing drugs

they're bringing crime

they're bringing rapists

 

that was what he said.

The quote I just coied and pasted from somewhere, I honestly didn't assess the grammar. I was on my phone so I was barely able to copy/paste it as it is, so I didn't provide a link. Sorry.

 

When you use a conjunction in speech a listener can't 100% tell which is intended, you have to go by context. "They are" is a fairly reasonable context in this situation. Their could also work if you mean "They are bringing their rapists". He was using sentence fragments during a speech (which is fine).

Edited January 24, 2018 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 hours ago, Ebunoluwa said:

Arrests of people trying to cross illegally into the U.S. from Mexico plunged to the lowest level since 1971, as fewer people attempted the trek, the Department of Homeland Security announced Tuesday.
Thanks for proving exactly my point when you quoted fewer people attempted the trek. 57 years even better than my 46. 

57 is the new 46.  What, you think BCking and NB are the only ones with phone issues here?

 

like I said... fewer people caught.  Someone POSTULATED that fewer people are making the trek.  But who can say for certain?  Shirley the possibility exists that some are making it over and not caught?  It’s not like we have an office in the US where illegals show up and let us know they made it undetected.  So I question the reason behind that “stat”.  

Edited January 24, 2018 by IDWAF

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

The quote I just coied and pasted from somewhere, I honestly didn't assess the grammar. I was on my phone so I was barely able to copy/paste it as it is, so I didn't provide a link. Sorry.

 

When you use a conjunction in speech a listener can't 100% tell which is intended, you have to go by context. "They are" is a fairly reasonable context in this situation.

and still, why would 'they' be 'sending' 'their' rapists? even this way, sounds like trump believes mexico has malicious intent toward the us. 'sending' ? when i go to canada, is the us sending me?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 minutes ago, bcking said:

The quote I just coied and pasted from somewhere, I honestly didn't assess the grammar. I was on my phone so I was barely able to copy/paste it as it is, so I didn't provide a link. Sorry.

 

When you use a conjunction in speech a listener can't 100% tell which is intended, you have to go by context. "They are" is a fairly reasonable context in this situation. Their could also work if you mean "They are bringing their rapists". He was using sentence fragments during a speech (which is fine).

No, your copy and paste is what I’ve read too.  Not saying you are wrong at all.  But “they’re rapists” in that context is awkward even for your boy Trump, wouldn’t you say?

[bcking 3,157]

13 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

No, your copy and paste is what I’ve read too.  Not saying you are wrong at all.  But “they’re rapists” in that context is awkward even for your boy Trump, wouldn’t you say?

Ya I think it's awkward because it switches from objects (Drugs, Crime) to a subjects (Rapists). They are bringing drugs and crime makes sense because the subject is "People" (the "they"). They are bringing rapists would be one person coming in, and that one person is bringing a rapist along with them.

 

Regardless I think we can assume what he intended to say was essentially that Mexico is sending generally bad people. I think it's fair to say overall his statement is that at least a majority are "bad" (crime, drugs, rape), and perhaps a minority are okay. I don't know if there is any data to back that up though.

 

Also - Does he, or you, or anyone else really think "Mexico" (as an entity...I guess the State?) is actually actively sending those people? Do we really think the Mexican government is getting together and saying "Hey lets send these rapists up to the USA. They will be so annoyed, it'll be fun!"?

Edited January 24, 2018 by bcking

[Boiler 46,103]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

Come on we should at least all be able to agree that both candidates (one of which is the current President) are untrustworthy and frequent liars. We can get into an argument about who lies more, and for what reasons (Big lies vs. "white lies")...but they are both pretty dishonest people.

Buddy, I have never said otherwise.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

20 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

57 is the new 46.  What, you think BCking and NB are the only ones with phone issues here?

 

like I said... fewer people caught.  Someone POSTULATED that fewer people are making the trek.  But who can say for certain?  Shirley the possibility exists that some are making it over and not caught?  It’s not like we have an office in the US where illegals show up and let us know they made it undetected.  So I question the reason behind that “stat”.  

As I learned in my criminal justice classes. Number of arrest made is the most meaningless statistics in all crime reports.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Boiler said:

We just missed out on one...

This to me implies that we do not currently have one in office. If you agree that they are both liars, we didn't really "miss out". We just chose one over the other.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

No country would ever empty it's prisons across open borders would they 

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

No country would ever empty it's prisons across open borders would they 

If you are claiming the government is actively involved in moving criminals intentionally across the border...

 

That is a bold accusation and you would need something to back it up otherwise you are talking out of your backside.

[Boiler 46,103]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

This to me implies that we do not currently have one in office. If you agree that they are both liars, we didn't really "miss out". We just chose one over the other.

No.

 

Not sure how you could take that and anyway are we not back in the who is worst category?

[Boiler 46,103]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

If you are claiming the government is actively involved in moving criminals intentionally across the border...

 

That is a bold accusation and you would need something to back it up otherwise you are talking out of your backside.

Well in the US Cities do it, well to the Homeless so why do you think it would not be possible.

 

I can think of some historical examples, starter for 10 Cuba.