Donald Trump for President Thread

[bring the ghost on]

The countless numbers that do assimilate yeah.

So, you accept that countless numbers do assimilate, you accept that any terrorist faction is a minority, yet you say you would ban all muslims from entering the country and don't believe we should have ever let muslims in?

 

[SNova]

So, you accept that countless numbers do assimilate, you accept that any terrorist faction is a minority, yet you say you would ban all muslims from entering the country and don't believe we should have ever let muslims in?

Yeah, obviously the majority are not terrorists. But how can one distinguish this when allowing entry? The security services are already too stretched.

 

[bring the ghost on]

Yeah, obviously the majority are not terrorists. But how can one distinguish this when allowing entry? The security services are already too stretched.

To me, it just seems a regressive, unfair and prejudice policy to ban all people of a certain religion from being allowed to set foot in our country, whether they have heritage, family, job links or otherwise here.

If we had this approach throughout history, we would have probably banned half the world's population including Germans, Irish, Italians, French, Russians to name a few.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem with Islamic extremism, of course there is, just not convinced a blanket ban will actually do anything other than punish a whole load of innocent people.

 

[SNova]

To me, it just seems a regressive, unfair and prejudice policy to ban all people of a certain religion from being allowed to set foot in our country, whether they have heritage, family, job links or otherwise here.

If we had this approach throughout history, we would have probably banned half the world's population including Germans, Irish, Italians, French, Russians to name a few.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem with Islamic extremism, of course there is, just not convinced a blanket ban will actually do anything other than punish a whole load of innocent people.

How does not allowing entry punish people though? If a sovereign country denied my entry I wouldn't feel like a victim.

 

[bring the ghost on]

How does not allowing entry punish people though? If a sovereign country denied my entry I wouldn't feel like a victim.

So if they let other people in but didn't let you in because you believed in a certain God, you would be fine with that?

What about if your whole family were based there?

 

[Seanjd]

How do you mean? Do you not see that as a worrying possibility?

More and more attacks followed by non action by the ruling elites will most likely push people to extreme positions.

That's what worries me.

And all the suffering could have been avoided.

---

Look I'll leave it at that. We'll never agree.

My position on the matter comes from me wanting the future to be safe for my family, future kids, the nation and for peaceful Muslims.

I try to look at the world as it is, not how it ought to be.

Okay then. As you seen genuinely scared to death of Islam extremists, and you are all about minimising risks for the safety of your future children, let's talk about other types of terrorism. Although Islamic terrorism has claimed the most lives in America over the last 20 years, we cannot ignore Christian/far-right terrorism either.

Surely America should think about banning entry of Christians too?

 

[VentureBrosEFC]

Interesting debate and this comment sticks out for me apart from @SNova racial / guns mumbo jumbo.

What does the oyster comment mean exactly?

The fact that modern man believes in a certain sense they somehow own the world and therefore deserve to have 24/7 access of every corner of it. Regardless of the wishes of the people inhabiting that place.

Even places like the jungles of papa New guinea somehow we feel are ours.

 

[SNova]

So if they let other people in but didn't let you in because you believed in a certain God, you would be fine with that?

What about if your whole family were based there?

It's up to the sovereign nation to decide. I view the nation as a home and it's within their right to decide who enters and who does not.

 

[bring the ghost on]

It's up to the sovereign nation to decide. I view the nation as a home and it's within their right to decide who enters and who does not.

Yes, it is up to the Sovereign Nation, but we're not talking about who decides, we're talking about what the decision should be.

Let's say for example, if a Muslim living in Pakistan had their whole family based over here and wanted to come and join the family business, you'd stop them?

 

[LinekersLegs]

It is my opinion that there are too many people on the PLANET period. As more immigrants come in they fill out the middle class (as they are generally affluent for their situations) that would be better served by better educating and progressing the lower classes already here instead of importing people to take their prospective places in the general workforce. It creates scenarios where funds are also funneled out of the country as earnings are shunted off to other countries as well when small town America is decaying in front of our eyes. To see the impoverished areas of middle and southern America makes many wonder why aid is sent all around the world for political gain when we are neglecting enormous populations of the people that are supposed to be their constituents and their "bosses".

Don't disagree that there are probably too many on the planet but see that largely leading to an envirnmental problems rather than an economic ones. Also agree that there should be more investment in the education/training of current US residents, especially those in difficult economic circumstances, and that education shouldn't just be focused academic attainment but have a more practical tilt to develop a high skill workforce usable by employers.

Where we disagree is the concept that immigrants take US citizens jobs. Obviously in some cases there is direct competition but overall think this is more than offset by immigrants creating jobs by their demand for goods and services, starting their own businesses that hire Americans (seen estimates that somewhere between a third to half Bay Area companies are owned by an immigrant) and generally targetting different jobs. This article probably sums up my beliefs https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ive-things-economists-know-about-immigration/

But I freely admit that as an immigrant (albeit legal) myself I am likely biased to believe that immigration does more good than harm.

 

[Snowball]

It's up to the sovereign nation to decide. I view the nation as a home and it's within their right to decide who enters and who does not.

I'd be careful of arguing that one too readily for fear of the Native Americans pushing you back out to sea from whence you came you intolerant hypocrite.

 

[VentureBrosEFC]

Don't disagree that there are probably too many on the planet but see that largely leading to an envirnmental problems rather than an economic ones. Also agree that there should be more investment in the education/training of current US residents, especially those in difficult economic circumstances, and that education shouldn't just be focused academic attainment but have a more practical tilt to develop a high skill workforce usable by employers.

Where we disagree is the concept that immigrants take US citizens jobs. Obviously in some cases there is direct competition but overall think this is more than offset by immigrants creating jobs by their demand for goods and services, starting their own businesses that hire Americans (seen estimates that somewhere between a third to half Bay Area companies are owned by an immigrant) and generally targetting different jobs. This article probably sums up my beliefs https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ive-things-economists-know-about-immigration/

But I freely admit that as an immigrant (albeit legal) myself I am likely biased to believe that immigration does more good than harm.

Where I think our signals are getting crossed is the idea of economic problems. Regarding population you already see how automation has reduced the number of jobs available to the undereducated. Now that doesn't necessarily mean the country is losing money as a result (I happen to think so but by proxy of jailing/subsidize healthcare etc. ... Due to the situations the poor find themselves in and the lack of knowledge in areas of health and the lack of opportunities leading to crime.) but the fact that the country as a whole is staying afloat doesn't detract from the deteriorating circumstances that the lower class find themselves in where they're seen as economic liabilities (ie Flint water supply).

As for employment competition. I cannot get around the idea that immigrants are taking US jobs because the way I conceptualize it is any job currently being filled with an immigrant could just as easily be filled with an American if the government we're willing to invest in our own people but yet we do not. Another point you raise that I'll have to contend is that immigrants create jobs for native residents. You use the example of the Bay Area but this thinking disregards the areas that do not see an influx in local immigrant population. Meaning it may (more probably is) be beneficial to the people of the Bay but I doubt anyone in Birmingham, AL or Johnson City, TN (incidentally there's an amazing Korean restaurant in JC) is reaping any reward. Now this may come across as accusatory or harsh but the main crux of my argument is that the government is failing the people already here and we should look to address our own inequalities before adding (in my opinion) to them.

All that being said as a fellow toffee I could care less if you took an American's job. I'd just be for barred immigration for Norwegians!

 

[LinekersLegs]

All that being said as a fellow toffee I could care less if you took an American's job. I'd just be for barred immigration for Norwegians!

lol

 

[SNova]

I'd be careful of arguing that one too readily for fear of the Native Americans pushing you back out to sea from whence you came you intolerant hypocrite.

They weren't invited by the Native Americans. They conquered them.

 

[dandydan]

Don't think comparing Trump to Hitler is an example of Godwin's Law at all, as it's a direct example in the same subject. A man who has built a political career out of attacking one type of people and capitalising on wider public anger against the status quo, who would be incredibly dangerous if ever afforded a position of power.

Replace Jews and Weimar Republic/November Traitors with Mexicans and Obama/Terrorism and you have the exact same person.

Capitalists and proliteriat can be exchanged with Jews and volk just as easily. And was with pretty much the same result.