The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
It's really quite simple.
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Yeah...the weekend has been filled with the HRC FBI releases and HRC's ridiculous responses.....Trump's visit to the black church in Detroit was slightly less ridiculous so I expect he'll make up some ground in the polls .... but not much.
Anyone who could watch Trump in that church and feel he was being genuine needs to back away from the vape. CNN coverage had me in stitches whenever a person of color who wasn't bought by Trump commented. The reactions were priceless because they were natural and not contrived. One gentleman caught off-gaurd honestly broke out in laughter when it was mentioned that Trump was well received and did anyone think Trump had convinced folks of his support. The response when he stopped laughing was...'That was a church clap. They call it a church clap because nice people in church behave nicely'. Several times during Trump's church speech, that he was reading from verbatim, he would add his own review of the speech by saying things like 'That is so true'. This made it obvious he was reading from a speech someone else wrote because 'That is so true' was said not as if he was emphasizing his own words but was said as if he was agreeing with someone else's. Wadda putz.
My other favorite is whenever a CNN commentator asks a Trump rep about a past Trump issue/comment and they deflect the question with 'Trump is honestly interested in the well-being of minorities.' Then the commentator asks the same question again about the past Trump issue and the rep deflects again without answering by referencing HRC. One commentator, obviously frustrated by the Trump rep approach said 'We can be here for hours but I'm going to continue asking you about that past situation until you answer'. The Trump rep never did answer the question.
Fear not! This will all work itself out when the debates are held. Right now Trump is on a short leash. Teleprompter or reading from a piece of paper. The debates will be real-time and he'll be off leash and unless they secretly attach an electro-shock device and an ear-phone he won't be able to stay on the tracks.
The first of three prime-time presidential debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is scheduled for Sept. 26 at Hofstra University in New York.
The other two debates are scheduled for Oct. 9 at Washington University in St. Louis, and Oct. 19 at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. All three debates will take place from 9 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Eastern.
CAN'T WAIT!
Anyone who could watch Trump in that church and feel he was being genuine needs to back away from the vape. CNN coverage had me in stitches whenever a person of color who wasn't bought by Trump commented. The reactions were priceless because they were natural and not contrived. One gentleman caught off-gaurd honestly broke out in laughter when it was mentioned that Trump was well received and did anyone think Trump had convinced folks of his support. The response when he stopped laughing was...'That was a church clap. They call it a church clap because nice people in church behave nicely'. Several times during Trump's church speech, that he was reading from verbatim, he would add his own review of the speech by saying things like 'That is so true'. This made it obvious he was reading from a speech someone else wrote because 'That is so true' was said not as if he was emphasizing his own words but was said as if he was agreeing with someone else's. Wadda putz.
My other favorite is whenever a CNN commentator asks a Trump rep about a past Trump issue/comment and they deflect the question with 'Trump is honestly interested in the well-being of minorities.' Then the commentator asks the same question again about the past Trump issue and the rep deflects again without answering by referencing HRC. One commentator, obviously frustrated by the Trump rep approach said 'We can be here for hours but I'm going to continue asking you about that past situation until you answer'. The Trump rep never did answer the question.
Fear not! This will all work itself out when the debates are held. Right now Trump is on a short leash. Teleprompter or reading from a piece of paper. The debates will be real-time and he'll be off leash and unless they secretly attach an electro-shock device and an ear-phone he won't be able to stay on the tracks.
The first of three prime-time presidential debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is scheduled for Sept. 26 at Hofstra University in New York.
The other two debates are scheduled for Oct. 9 at Washington University in St. Louis, and Oct. 19 at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. All three debates will take place from 9 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Eastern.
CAN'T WAIT!
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
Dancing with Mr. D
by D.R. Tucker
September 4, 2016 11:30 AM
Political Animal Blog
So, what will you do if the worst happens?
I still remember seeing the horrified looks in the eyes of John Kerry’s supporters outside of Boston’s Faneuil Hall on the afternoon of November 3, 2004, after it was announced that Kerry would concede defeat to President George W. Bush, thus condemning this country to four more years of hate, lies and fear. The faces of Kerry’s Boston backers were drained of life and color; they looked as though fate had mugged them.
They could see a dark future, not unlike the protagonist in the Stephen King novel The Dead Zone. They knew what would come: more lives needlessly lost in Iraq, more lives lost to gun violence here in the United States, more carbon pollution cooking the planet, more right-wing ideologues appointed to the federal judiciary, more disdain for our democracy.
The eerie thing is, November 3, 2004 will be remembered as a moment of relative joy and frivolity if Donald Trump wins on November 8, 2016. As melancholy as that moment was twelve years ago, it ultimately led to better days for our land–specifically November 4, 2008 and November 6, 2012. Does anyone really think better days will come for this country if Trump procures Presidential power?
Remember the raw racism on the infamous Nixon tapes–how the 37th President make it clear that he saw black and brown people not as citizens but as nuisances? That attitude would return to the White House under a Trump administration. Imagine that attitude flourishing in a country with an alt-right media infrastructure that didn’t exist in Nixon’s day–and what that would mean for vulnerable people of color.
The thought of racists feeling empowered to engage in violence towards citizens of color in a Trump administration literally keeps me awake at night. You may recall the recent case of an apparently pro-Trump white supremacist in Washington state who viciously attacked a black man after he kissed his white girlfriend. That story chilled me; I have a number of friends who have found love across the color line, and the thought of a terrorist Trumpkin harming them in the bigoted billionaire’s name is frightening.
What will you do if Trump and Mike Pence, that gruesome twosome, win on November 8? I have a friend who jokes that if Trump and Pence defeat Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, he will call Child Protective Services on every pro-Trump parent he knows, since their decision to vote for the Donald would constitute probable cause to investigate child maltreatment. I certainly wouldn’t go that far, but if I had a daughter or a son, and I learned that one of their playdate pals had parents who voted for Trump, I would think twice about continuing to let my child associate in any capacity with such a questionable family.
Consider this an open thread. How will you react if Trump wins? Will you consider moving from America, in order to find a safe space from stateside stupidity? Will you stay and fight to limit Trump’s damage to one term? As for me, I think I’ll take my cue from the great TV on the Radio song “Happy Idiot”: I’m gonna bang my head to the wall/’till I feel like nothing at all…
by D.R. Tucker
September 4, 2016 11:30 AM
Political Animal Blog
So, what will you do if the worst happens?
I still remember seeing the horrified looks in the eyes of John Kerry’s supporters outside of Boston’s Faneuil Hall on the afternoon of November 3, 2004, after it was announced that Kerry would concede defeat to President George W. Bush, thus condemning this country to four more years of hate, lies and fear. The faces of Kerry’s Boston backers were drained of life and color; they looked as though fate had mugged them.
They could see a dark future, not unlike the protagonist in the Stephen King novel The Dead Zone. They knew what would come: more lives needlessly lost in Iraq, more lives lost to gun violence here in the United States, more carbon pollution cooking the planet, more right-wing ideologues appointed to the federal judiciary, more disdain for our democracy.
The eerie thing is, November 3, 2004 will be remembered as a moment of relative joy and frivolity if Donald Trump wins on November 8, 2016. As melancholy as that moment was twelve years ago, it ultimately led to better days for our land–specifically November 4, 2008 and November 6, 2012. Does anyone really think better days will come for this country if Trump procures Presidential power?
Remember the raw racism on the infamous Nixon tapes–how the 37th President make it clear that he saw black and brown people not as citizens but as nuisances? That attitude would return to the White House under a Trump administration. Imagine that attitude flourishing in a country with an alt-right media infrastructure that didn’t exist in Nixon’s day–and what that would mean for vulnerable people of color.
The thought of racists feeling empowered to engage in violence towards citizens of color in a Trump administration literally keeps me awake at night. You may recall the recent case of an apparently pro-Trump white supremacist in Washington state who viciously attacked a black man after he kissed his white girlfriend. That story chilled me; I have a number of friends who have found love across the color line, and the thought of a terrorist Trumpkin harming them in the bigoted billionaire’s name is frightening.
What will you do if Trump and Mike Pence, that gruesome twosome, win on November 8? I have a friend who jokes that if Trump and Pence defeat Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, he will call Child Protective Services on every pro-Trump parent he knows, since their decision to vote for the Donald would constitute probable cause to investigate child maltreatment. I certainly wouldn’t go that far, but if I had a daughter or a son, and I learned that one of their playdate pals had parents who voted for Trump, I would think twice about continuing to let my child associate in any capacity with such a questionable family.
Consider this an open thread. How will you react if Trump wins? Will you consider moving from America, in order to find a safe space from stateside stupidity? Will you stay and fight to limit Trump’s damage to one term? As for me, I think I’ll take my cue from the great TV on the Radio song “Happy Idiot”: I’m gonna bang my head to the wall/’till I feel like nothing at all…
grokit
well-worn member
I want to like hillary, or at least feel okay about her. I'm fully aware of how the hate/spin machine has done nothing else for decades but manipulate our emotions against a fictional dragon lady that doesn't seem to exist in real life. But she makes it so hard! It's like her first instinct is always to obfuscate, and she has covered up the truth so many times that she doesn't even seem to understand the meaning of the word transparency, or why her lack of it is turning so many people off. Even though I am aware that it's a leftover defensive strategy from her years in the white house, on an emotional level this doesn't help to reassure me at all. I believe that the clinton foundation is just trying to provide a counterpoint to the power of the bush clan, which would be great if they could be more transparent and less orwellian in their mechanizations. We're pretty fucked no matter who wins between these two tools, because left/right polarity is reaching a tipping point; even if congress doesn't change we could have open revolt every time a supreme court justice is named; just one example of how we're being manipulated into ignoring many real issues that affect us.
Last edited:
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
Assuming that Hillary wins the election there is a very good chance that the Dems will get the Senate as well. On the first day of the new Senate the majority will decide that filibusters will be disallowed on Supreme Court nominations.
That will effectively end any opportunity for the Repubs to fuck around with the Supreme Court appointments. It will only take Democratic votes to confirm judges.
And the Republicans will be very sorry they didn't confirm President Obama's choice for the court.
That will effectively end any opportunity for the Repubs to fuck around with the Supreme Court appointments. It will only take Democratic votes to confirm judges.
And the Republicans will be very sorry they didn't confirm President Obama's choice for the court.
More definitive proof of bad character.
BD9
Well-Known Member
I hope this pans out, but I have my doubts.
The 'trump dumpers' and those that have already conceded the presidential election are putting all their efforts, and cash, into congressional races.
I still haven't decided if I'm going to vote for a president, but you're damn skippy I'm voting for all the congressional race.
grokit
well-worn member
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
The Top Five Most Vulnerable GOP Senate Seats
By Rich Baehr March 15, 2016
The current election cycle was shaping up as a difficult one for Republican senators even before Donald Trump became the leader in the battle for the GOP presidential nomination.
Just as Democrats were exposed in 2014 and lost nine Senate seats and their majority, Republicans have 24 seats to defend in 2016 versus only 10 for Democrats. And this is a presidential year, when Democratic turnout is usually far stronger than for midterms. In 2008 and 2012, the last two presidential election years, Democrats picked up Senate seats (a net of 10), while Republicans had substantial gains from the last two midterms in 2010 and 2014 (a net of 15).
In 2014 Republicans had many targets, as Democrats were defending seats in seven states Mitt Romney won in 2012: North Carolina, Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, South Dakota, Montana, and Alaska. Republicans also picked up an open seat in Iowa and won Colorado, two Obama states from 2012.
In 2016, the picture is almost reversed. Republicans are defending seats in seven states Obama won in 2012: New Hampshire, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Iowa. One big difference between 2014 and 2016 is that six of the Democratic seats Republicans won in 2014 were in states Romney had won by 14% or more (only North Carolina had been a narrow Romney victory by 2%). In 2016, only one of the Republican seats -- Mark Kirk’s in Illinois -- is in a state that is deeply blue, a 17-point Obama win in 2012. In the other six states, Obama won by 7% or less.
Which are the five most endangered Republican-held Senate seats? Most of the serious political analysts have rated Kirk’s and Ron Johnson’s in Wisconsin as the two most vulnerable in 2016, and regard both as, at best, toss-ups or as races leaning to the Democrats.
Johnson will face a rematch against the former senator he defeated in 2010, Russ Feingold. In polls to date, both Kirk and Johnson are behind, in some surveys by 10% or more.
---------------------
The House is nearly impossible for the Dems unless Hillary gets that landslide. The Senate, however...
By Rich Baehr March 15, 2016
The current election cycle was shaping up as a difficult one for Republican senators even before Donald Trump became the leader in the battle for the GOP presidential nomination.
Just as Democrats were exposed in 2014 and lost nine Senate seats and their majority, Republicans have 24 seats to defend in 2016 versus only 10 for Democrats. And this is a presidential year, when Democratic turnout is usually far stronger than for midterms. In 2008 and 2012, the last two presidential election years, Democrats picked up Senate seats (a net of 10), while Republicans had substantial gains from the last two midterms in 2010 and 2014 (a net of 15).
In 2014 Republicans had many targets, as Democrats were defending seats in seven states Mitt Romney won in 2012: North Carolina, Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, South Dakota, Montana, and Alaska. Republicans also picked up an open seat in Iowa and won Colorado, two Obama states from 2012.
In 2016, the picture is almost reversed. Republicans are defending seats in seven states Obama won in 2012: New Hampshire, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Iowa. One big difference between 2014 and 2016 is that six of the Democratic seats Republicans won in 2014 were in states Romney had won by 14% or more (only North Carolina had been a narrow Romney victory by 2%). In 2016, only one of the Republican seats -- Mark Kirk’s in Illinois -- is in a state that is deeply blue, a 17-point Obama win in 2012. In the other six states, Obama won by 7% or less.
Which are the five most endangered Republican-held Senate seats? Most of the serious political analysts have rated Kirk’s and Ron Johnson’s in Wisconsin as the two most vulnerable in 2016, and regard both as, at best, toss-ups or as races leaning to the Democrats.
Johnson will face a rematch against the former senator he defeated in 2010, Russ Feingold. In polls to date, both Kirk and Johnson are behind, in some surveys by 10% or more.
---------------------
The House is nearly impossible for the Dems unless Hillary gets that landslide. The Senate, however...
TeeJay1952
Well-Known Member
True enough!
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
Trump would need to get a higher number of the minority's vote than he's probably able to get. He's talking about deporting even folks that were born here. He keeps changing his mind on the deportation issue. People can't believe what he says. Even though Hillary is a terrible candidate Trump is still way worse.
I think most folks agree we don't want criminals here but the majority of the Hispanics are law abiding people. Trump keeps talking in circles. One day he's says all the undocumented people need to go back to their home country and the next day we are hearing something different. I tend to not believe anything he says. I think a lot of other voters feel that way.
I'm thinking if Hillary had a stronger opponent she would lose the election. I'm still really nervous about all the emails still out there. There is a viable third party candidate at least. My plan today is to still vote for Hillary.
The minority voting block of people are only getting bigger. Both parties need to be a president for all the people. We should be one America. I'm hoping something is learned here in this election.
I had read where the RNC is putting their money elsewhere. Evidently Jerrod Kirshner ( Ivanka's husband) had words with someone from the RNC about funding that Trump isn't getting. The RNC is concerned about all the republican senators and congress people that are having elections other than Trump. Maybe they realize that he probably won't win and they don't want to waste the money on him.
Edit
I didn't mean to be predjudice. I'm sure there is a small amount of criminals that are illegal citizens from various places not just Hispanics. What about folks that come across the Canadian boarder? I read it again I didn't mean to single out Hispanics. I could change that but I will leave it and apologize if I offended anyone. Sorry about that Gunky, I guess I didn't say it right. I sure as hell didn't mean the way you interpreted it.
We have plenty of Americans that are criminals.
A different subject altogether - I see white males begging for money with signs on the side of the road. I never see Hispanics because they are usually out working.
I think most folks agree we don't want criminals here but the majority of the Hispanics are law abiding people. Trump keeps talking in circles. One day he's says all the undocumented people need to go back to their home country and the next day we are hearing something different. I tend to not believe anything he says. I think a lot of other voters feel that way.
I'm thinking if Hillary had a stronger opponent she would lose the election. I'm still really nervous about all the emails still out there. There is a viable third party candidate at least. My plan today is to still vote for Hillary.
The minority voting block of people are only getting bigger. Both parties need to be a president for all the people. We should be one America. I'm hoping something is learned here in this election.
I had read where the RNC is putting their money elsewhere. Evidently Jerrod Kirshner ( Ivanka's husband) had words with someone from the RNC about funding that Trump isn't getting. The RNC is concerned about all the republican senators and congress people that are having elections other than Trump. Maybe they realize that he probably won't win and they don't want to waste the money on him.
Edit
I didn't mean to be predjudice. I'm sure there is a small amount of criminals that are illegal citizens from various places not just Hispanics. What about folks that come across the Canadian boarder? I read it again I didn't mean to single out Hispanics. I could change that but I will leave it and apologize if I offended anyone. Sorry about that Gunky, I guess I didn't say it right. I sure as hell didn't mean the way you interpreted it.
We have plenty of Americans that are criminals.
A different subject altogether - I see white males begging for money with signs on the side of the road. I never see Hispanics because they are usually out working.
Last edited:
Gunky
Well-Known Member
I guess I understand what you are trying to say but this is a horrible way to say it. You are trafficking in ethnic stereotypes and put it so badly that it sounds like 51% of Hispanics are good folks (but...). Whether somebody commits a crime has nothing to do with his or her race, religion, or ethnic background.
neverforget711
Well-Known Member
I don't think Hispanics would be that taken aback, the lawful and unaffiliated come here to leave that and not bring those conditions with them, that safety angle is what he is offering to citizens. It's just like the "what do you have to lose" reasoning with the African-Americans, it didn't think it was that edgy , it just sound street rap lyrics.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
Donald Trump‘s firing against his own party again tonight, attacking Senator Jeff Flake (R, AZ) for criticizing the mogul on his inability to hold a stable position on immigration.
Flake appeared today on CBS’ Face the Nation, where he told John Dickerson that Trump’s destabilization of the electoral map means that Arizona is no longer a reliable red state for 2016. Flake has been a conservative critic of Trump for some time, and he said today that he cannot bring himself to support the Republican Party’s choice right now.
“The speech in Mexico and that action, I think all of us had some hope after that that he might be changing the tone and tenor of his campaign,” said Flake. “But then when the speech was delivered in Arizona later that day, he seemed to be right back where he has been.”
This was yesterday. Sept 4 2016
I'm Hispanic, and I didn't interpreted what @CarolKing said offensive, on the other hand, when Trump announced he was running for president that was no doubt offensive, insinuating that most of us are criminals, with the exception of some being good.
I don't understand why all the hate towards Hispanics, specially Mexicans by some groups in society, I can go on and on about all the positive contributions to society they have made, but hateful people don't want to her it.
If you are in So. California and are familiar with Downey (The Mexican Beverly Hills), and haven't visit in the last 5 years, please come and visit on a weekend and tell me what do you think, it is not just Mexicans, but people of all ethnicities that have contributed to the economic boom here, and it is not artificial at all like the housing bubble created by Wall Street (no one is crying to deport those criminals), this boom started by a Cuban bakery and will last.
And like I said it before, look at the evidence, don't believe the lies like the one about Hispanics sending all their money to their countries, please visit a Gonzalez Northgate market on a weekend, good luck finding parking in the first place, it is bumper to bumper inside, any other large chain supermarket will envy that, Michelle Obama visited one store not long ago and was impressed by what she saw.
I work at an Affirmative Action company, and I see good and bad workers from all ethnicities, same goes for criminals, just like George Carlin said " you find assholes in all races ".
lwien
Well-Known Member
.......
Gunky
Well-Known Member
Hispanics contribute enormously to the country. I am not Hispanic but I love the culture, the food, the music. Oddly enough, undocumented workers actually contribute more than most. They do the least desirable, most back-breaking manual labor jobs like agricultural work, cleaning and so on for the lowest wages but get no benefits whatsoever like unemployment insurance, social security, etc. We actually need these people and they should be legalized and our immigration system should change to reflect the deep roots and relations in this country of millions of undocumented workers. The situation requires compassion and rational thinking; Trump responds to it with tribalism, race baiting, scapegoating, and inexcusable daily threats to the well-being of the citizen children of the undocumented. Trump here, as in all aspects of his business, doesn't give a shit who gets hurt as long as he benefits.
Silat
When the Facts Change, I Change My Mind.
Donald Trump‘s firing against his own party again tonight, attacking Senator Jeff Flake (R, AZ) for criticizing the mogul on his inability to hold a stable position on immigration.
Flake appeared today on CBS’ Face the Nation, where he told John Dickerson that Trump’s destabilization of the electoral map means that Arizona is no longer a reliable red state for 2016. Flake has been a conservative critic of Trump for some time, and he said today that he cannot bring himself to support the Republican Party’s choice right now.
“The speech in Mexico and that action, I think all of us had some hope after that that he might be changing the tone and tenor of his campaign,” said Flake. “But then when the speech was delivered in Arizona later that day, he seemed to be right back where he has been.”
This was yesterday. Sept 4 2016
The extremist Flake saw the writing on the wall and wants to stay in office. So he turned on Drumpf. Check out his record on women.
KimDracula
Well-Known Member
On a recent podcast (The Weeds) Ezra Klein brought up a point which is almost always lost in the immigration debate. This is that we need immigration to survive. Not only are all the things Gunky said above true, but as birth rates drop in the developed world and populations get older and less productive, the infusion of young foreign labor is desirable all the way around. There is rarely an argument made about immigration that doesn't try to scapegoat them and rely on scaring the natives to further an agenda. It's a good thing that we are going to need to promote more of in the future.
little maggie
Well-Known Member
Most immigrants to this country since its inception have run into hostility. That would include Trump's ancestors. Somehow I think that reaction is unavoidable even though I don't understand it. I live in Oregon but the city I grew up in had more ethnic diversity than other places I've lived. And there it was the more established immigrants hostile to the newer ones from the same country.
ClearBlueLou
unbearably light in the being....
They're both manipulative bullshit: as bullshit is inherently compatible with bullshit, it triggers no alarms in...most folksWhen I think of all the mexicans that want to steal our jobs, along with all the mexicans that are too lazy to work, I blow a fucking circuit because these two possibilities cannot co-exist in any sane reality.
The problem of immigration IS the problem of racism: "we" (white, owning, 'European-identifying') already have a servant class - stolen fair-and-square from Africa - who we must treat as if they were 'real' citizens (wink, wink); by importing illegal workers from the Latin regions, we can hurt our own servant class while insulting them, and pocket plenty from the pocket-change paid to day-laboroers (many of whom are in fact skilled tradesmen), AND from the generally suppressive effects these "wages" have on the larger economy...and again, hitting our own servant class hardest - and reminding them not only of their place, but that they have replacements.
Unfortunately, introducing a different servant-class grouping complicates many of the same things that make our pre-migrant situation so sticky: we have to treat the new underclass as if they were people, too - and that just cuts against the grain with your average-white-bandmember - I mean, if we can't treat them as disposable, how can we dispose of them without looking bad?
I use the term "servant class" deliberately: the "nice" people, the ones who believe there should be a servant class (and that they should themselves get to have servants), have been demonizing everyone who talks about race in modern America, and excoriating communities of color for "being scary" to the "nice" people, and for not understanding that they MUST be shot when they get 'out of position'. Must maintain order, now, mustn't we?
Remains to be seen whether we CAN and WILL treat citizens of color as ACTUAL citizens someday, but we keep failing that one so far....
==
Worthwhile to keep in mind that Oregon was designed as a "white man's paradise" and was rendered unsafe, unhealthy and unwelcoming for persons of any color other than pink.
I love it that there is so much diversity there NOW - but I'm ready to bet it doesn't extend far out of town in any direction.
BD9
Well-Known Member
Instead of building a wall, which we already have, why not punish the corporations that hire illegal immigrants?
Because there are already 'laws' in place but are not enforced because corporations have lobbyists in place to tell congress, "It's too expensive and hard to verify work visas and eligibility ". In other words, "We like paying these people less. It improves our bottom line".
The 'wall' and 'fence' proposals help get people elected. South Western states know this. They get millions of tax dollars for 'border protection'. The whole thing is sickening .
Build the wall at Ohio fair,
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ild-great-trump-wall-labor-day-weekend-video/
Because there are already 'laws' in place but are not enforced because corporations have lobbyists in place to tell congress, "It's too expensive and hard to verify work visas and eligibility ". In other words, "We like paying these people less. It improves our bottom line".
The 'wall' and 'fence' proposals help get people elected. South Western states know this. They get millions of tax dollars for 'border protection'. The whole thing is sickening .
Build the wall at Ohio fair,
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ild-great-trump-wall-labor-day-weekend-video/