Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Can Trump really do that?

Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
So, I think most of the Trump supporters on this site would agree that if Trump could actually implement his insane immigration policies, then he shouldn't be elected. So far, the general consensus has been that Trump would *not* be able to do so, and thus there's no harm in electing him (policy-wise). However, EndarkenedRationalist recently showed me an interesting blogpost which made me doubt that to be the case: http://www.cracked.com...

Tl;dr - it details ways that Trump could make some of his policies happen.
-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"
-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.
-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances

Is this actually possible? Can Trump really do that?

I don't really care about the ban on Muslim immigration as long as it's actually temporary. But mass-deportation is just a terrible, terrible policy any way you look at it. And while idea of a border fence being built doesn't bother me much, that specific method of "making Mexico pay for it" is quite troubling. If Trump can actually make that stuff happen, I may be renouncing my support for him and jumping onto the Hillary Clinton train (even tho she's a robotic shill who no one likes). Would hope for a brokered convention too, just to be safe.

What says you, DDO ?
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 7:31:10 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
What the living fvck. Being for a ban on Muslim immigration is discriminating people based on their religion, is this no longer a big deal, does this no longer matter anymore? We can ban people from doing things because of their religion. We can favor certain religious groups over others, what the living fvck
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 7:39:54 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Kinda hard to take an article seriously that has multiple references to Hitler in it. It's not like he is shipping Americans back to Africa on deathships....
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 7:47:23 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
False. I did not assume that Trump is incapable of succeeding in deporting illegals as president.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 7:54:03 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM, Romaniii wrote:
So, I think most of the Trump supporters on this site would agree that if Trump could actually implement his insane immigration policies, then he shouldn't be elected. So far, the general consensus has been that Trump would *not* be able to do so, and thus there's no harm in electing him (policy-wise). However, EndarkenedRationalist recently showed me an interesting blogpost which made me doubt that to be the case: http://www.cracked.com...

Tl;dr - it details ways that Trump could make some of his policies happen.
-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"
-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.
-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances

Is this actually possible? Can Trump really do that?

I don't really care about the ban on Muslim immigration as long as it's actually temporary. But mass-deportation is just a terrible, terrible policy any way you look at it. And while idea of a border fence being built doesn't bother me much, that specific method of "making Mexico pay for it" is quite troubling. If Trump can actually make that stuff happen, I may be renouncing my support for him and jumping onto the Hillary Clinton train (even tho she's a robotic shill who no one likes). Would hope for a brokered convention too, just to be safe.

What says you, DDO ?

Trump can do whatever the hell he wants. #can'tstumptheTrump
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:07:46 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:31:10 PM, Hayd wrote:
What the living fvck. Being for a ban on Muslim immigration is discriminating people based on their religion, is this no longer a big deal, does this no longer matter anymore? We can ban people from doing things because of their religion. We can favor certain religious groups over others, what the living fvck

Lmao. Would you be okay with temporarily halting ALL immigration instead?
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:09:24 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:39:54 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
Kinda hard to take an article seriously that has multiple references to Hitler in it. It's not like he is shipping Americans back to Africa on deathships....

I agree that comparing Trump to Hitler is ridiculous, but the specific legal references it makes are all accurate, as far as I can tell.
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:11:02 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:47:23 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
False. I did not assume that Trump is incapable of succeeding in deporting illegals as president.

The massive social and economic ramifications of deporting 11 million immigrants don't scare you at all ?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:11:44 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 8:11:02 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:47:23 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
False. I did not assume that Trump is incapable of succeeding in deporting illegals as president.

The massive social and economic ramifications of deporting 11 million immigrants don't scare you at all ?

Nope
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:15:49 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
That being said, studies have shown that what most illegals really want is work programs of the likes that Cesar Chavez helped shut down. Let's just give them that instead.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
chass23RN
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:24:52 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:31:10 PM, Hayd wrote:
What the living fvck. Being for a ban on Muslim immigration is discriminating people based on their religion, is this no longer a big deal, does this no longer matter anymore? We can ban people from doing things because of their religion. We can favor certain religious groups over others, what the living fvck

I think we need to get our country in order before we keep allowing immigrants from anywhere Muslim or not. I feel inviting people here that have a culture that is against American ways and that have people who want nothing more than to kill Americans i.e ISIS is not a terrible idea. Why should we be so tolerant to other cultures even if they pose a threat? Do you see countries in the middle east inviting Americans over with open arms and spending their money on us? If we quit taking care of everyone else maybe these crappy countries will start taking care of themselves. I am not racist at all my step dad is from Lebanon and if his parents didn't come here he wouldn't be in my life however back then America was in the position to do so. His family started businesses and became very wealthy. You don't see much of this going on now days. We are paying for them and it is hurting the middle class.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:29:35 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 8:09:24 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:39:54 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
Kinda hard to take an article seriously that has multiple references to Hitler in it. It's not like he is shipping Americans back to Africa on deathships....

I agree that comparing Trump to Hitler is ridiculous, but the specific legal references it makes are all accurate, as far as I can tell.
Argumentum ad Nazium

Unfortunately, it does not go without saying that in our examinations we must avoid the fallacy that in the last decades has frequently been used as a substitute for the reductio ad absurdum: the reductio ad Hitlerum. A view is not refuted by the fact that it happens to have been shared by Hitler.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:36:36 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 8:07:46 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:31:10 PM, Hayd wrote:
What the living fvck. Being for a ban on Muslim immigration is discriminating people based on their religion, is this no longer a big deal, does this no longer matter anymore? We can ban people from doing things because of their religion. We can favor certain religious groups over others, what the living fvck

Lmao. Would you be okay with temporarily halting ALL immigration instead?

I'd be okay with halting all immigration.

What does it matter if its temporary? Its not just for the sake of the Muslims who can enter the country after the ban is lifted. My objections also come from the fact that if a ban is implemented, the secular nature of the United States is undermined. And we'd be no better than religious theocracies which prohibit freedom of religion. I care about what it says about us as Americans to be okay with religious discrimination.

In all of this debate, no Trumpster on this site has answered how Trump is going to find out who is a muslim anyways. What if they say they're not a muslim? Should the ban be expanded to all "brown" people from south and southeast Asia?
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 9:01:13 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 8:36:36 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/5/2016 8:07:46 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:31:10 PM, Hayd wrote:
What the living fvck. Being for a ban on Muslim immigration is discriminating people based on their religion, is this no longer a big deal, does this no longer matter anymore? We can ban people from doing things because of their religion. We can favor certain religious groups over others, what the living fvck

Lmao. Would you be okay with temporarily halting ALL immigration instead?

I'd be okay with halting all immigration.

I mean, that alternative is fine with me as well, but I personally find it a bit silly to needlessly inconvenience thousands of other immigrants for the sake of upholding some abstract, politically correct ideal of total religious/ethnic equality.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 9:21:32 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM, Romaniii wrote:
So, I think most of the Trump supporters on this site would agree that if Trump could actually implement his insane immigration policies, then he shouldn't be elected. So far, the general consensus has been that Trump would *not* be able to do so, and thus there's no harm in electing him (policy-wise). However, EndarkenedRationalist recently showed me an interesting blogpost which made me doubt that to be the case: http://www.cracked.com...

Tl;dr - it details ways that Trump could make some of his policies happen.
-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"
-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.
-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances

Is this actually possible? Can Trump really do that?

I don't really care about the ban on Muslim immigration as long as it's actually temporary. But mass-deportation is just a terrible, terrible policy any way you look at it. And while idea of a border fence being built doesn't bother me much, that specific method of "making Mexico pay for it" is quite troubling. If Trump can actually make that stuff happen, I may be renouncing my support for him and jumping onto the Hillary Clinton train (even tho she's a robotic shill who no one likes). Would hope for a brokered convention too, just to be safe.

What says you, DDO ?

Why do you think deportation of illegal immigrants is a bad thing? I assume it's because of how much it would cost to do it?
ironslippers
Posts: 509
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 10:04:14 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM, Romaniii wrote:
One should always use caution when reviewing headline snippets
Tl;dr - it details ways that Trump could make some of his policies happen.
-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"
This would be temporary ban, until vetting process is insured. Even if the US halted all migration from countries that harbor radical Islamic terrorists, its only a portion of Muslims in the world that would be denied entry. This is no more discriminating than those same groups (terrorists) recruitment policies.
-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.
Realistically many migrants (if here LEGALLY) will have their paperwork sorted out before ICE knocks on the door, and many others would get temporary visas as their paper work is being filed.
-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances
This is first I've heard of this approach. To fund building a wall the US could start by revoking the half a billion dollars a year the US pays to Mexico in foreign aid. Then the US can negotiate the actually building of the wall, Mexico would be short sighted to pass up the opportunity to take part in a public works project of this size that will create numerous jobs and use millions of $$ in materials. Also, there is probably a way to filter out and confiscate Mexican drug money that is laundered in the US. And if this isn't enough, Tariffs can be imposed inbound and/or outbound this would be very contentious regarding NAFTA (which Trump disapproves of).

When most people speak of migration, I am amazed by the lack of appreciation and respect for one's own sovereignty
Everyone stands on their own dung hill and speaks out about someone else's - Nathan Krusemark
Its easier to criticize and hate than it is to support and create - I Ron Slippers
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 10:05:42 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 9:01:13 PM, Romaniii wrote:

I mean, that alternative is fine with me as well, but I personally find it a bit silly to needlessly inconvenience thousands of other immigrants for the sake of upholding some abstract, politically correct ideal of total religious/ethnic equality.

The mistake is in buying into the political rhetoric and mass paranoia that only muslims are terrorists.

There are criminals, terrorists, murderers, etc of all races and religions. Nothing is solved by picking out a religion, blaming them for terrorism and barring their entry.

The Virginia Tech shooting could have been avoided if only we didn't admit Asians into colleges. Lets put a temporary ban on Asian college applications until its resolved.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 10:12:40 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:04:14 PM, ironslippers wrote:
This is no more discriminating than those same groups (terrorists) recruitment policies.

Exactly. To put America on the same level as these terrorists is grave insult to its citizens. We're nothing like them and terrorists are not the role models whom we look up to in order to determine our policies. They discriminate. They impose their own religious laws. They allow no religious freedom. We are a free country that lets people practice whatever religion they want.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 10:23:50 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:12:40 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:04:14 PM, ironslippers wrote:
This is no more discriminating than those same groups (terrorists) recruitment policies.

Exactly. To put America on the same level as these terrorists is grave insult to its citizens. We're nothing like them and terrorists are not the role models whom we look up to in order to determine our policies. They discriminate. They impose their own religious laws. They allow no religious freedom. We are a free country that lets people practice whatever religion they want.

Yes, kill terrorists with love, not bombs. Hear hear!
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 10:59:46 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 9:21:32 PM, Chloe8 wrote:

Why do you think deportation of illegal immigrants is a bad thing? I assume it's because of how much it would cost to do it?

No... it's because most of those illegal immigrants have already been integrated into our society and economy, so forcing them all to leave is massively damaging to us as a country. Of course, there's also the suffering inflicted upon the immigrants themselves, but I'm assuming you don't care about that part (even though you should).
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 11:13:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:04:14 PM, ironslippers wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM, Romaniii wrote:
One should always use caution when reviewing headline snippets
Tl;dr - it details ways that Trump could make some of his policies happen.
-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"
This would be temporary ban, until vetting process is insured. Even if the US halted all migration from countries that harbor radical Islamic terrorists, its only a portion of Muslims in the world that would be denied entry. This is no more discriminating than those same groups (terrorists) recruitment policies.

Like I said, this particular policy doesn't bother me too much.

-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.
Realistically many migrants (if here LEGALLY) will have their paperwork sorted out before ICE knocks on the door, and many others would get temporary visas as their paper work is being filed.

I'm obviously talking about the mass-deportation of ILLEGAL immigrants, here...

-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances
This is first I've heard of this approach. To fund building a wall the US could start by revoking the half a billion dollars a year the US pays to Mexico in foreign aid. Then the US can negotiate the actually building of the wall, Mexico would be short sighted to pass up the opportunity to take part in a public works project of this size that will create numerous jobs and use millions of $$ in materials. Also, there is probably a way to filter out and confiscate Mexican drug money that is laundered in the US. And if this isn't enough, Tariffs can be imposed inbound and/or outbound this would be very contentious regarding NAFTA (which Trump disapproves of).

All of those ideas require the cooperation of Congress, though, which Trump isn't gonna get -- the point of this post is that Trump can implement most of his immigration policies all on his own, without having to deal with Congress at all.
ironslippers
Posts: 509
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 11:19:03 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 11:13:12 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:04:14 PM, ironslippers wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM, Romaniii wrote:
One should always use caution when reviewing headline snippets
Tl;dr - it details ways that Trump could make some of his policies happen.
-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"
This would be temporary ban, until vetting process is insured. Even if the US halted all migration from countries that harbor radical Islamic terrorists, its only a portion of Muslims in the world that would be denied entry. This is no more discriminating than those same groups (terrorists) recruitment policies.

Like I said, this particular policy doesn't bother me too much.

-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.
Realistically many migrants (if here LEGALLY) will have their paperwork sorted out before ICE knocks on the door, and many others would get temporary visas as their paper work is being filed.

I'm obviously talking about the mass-deportation of ILLEGAL immigrants, here...

-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances
This is first I've heard of this approach. To fund building a wall the US could start by revoking the half a billion dollars a year the US pays to Mexico in foreign aid. Then the US can negotiate the actually building of the wall, Mexico would be short sighted to pass up the opportunity to take part in a public works project of this size that will create numerous jobs and use millions of $$ in materials. Also, there is probably a way to filter out and confiscate Mexican drug money that is laundered in the US. And if this isn't enough, Tariffs can be imposed inbound and/or outbound this would be very contentious regarding NAFTA (which Trump disapproves of).

All of those ideas require the cooperation of Congress, though, which Trump isn't gonna get -- the point of this post is that Trump can implement most of his immigration policies all on his own, without having to deal with Congress at all.

If Obama can issue executive order to circumvent congress, the next president will be able to as well.
Everyone stands on their own dung hill and speaks out about someone else's - Nathan Krusemark
Its easier to criticize and hate than it is to support and create - I Ron Slippers
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 11:39:25 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:59:46 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 9:21:32 PM, Chloe8 wrote:

Why do you think deportation of illegal immigrants is a bad thing? I assume it's because of how much it would cost to do it?

No... it's because most of those illegal immigrants have already been integrated into our society and economy, so forcing them all to leave is massively damaging to us as a country. Of course, there's also the suffering inflicted upon the immigrants themselves, but I'm assuming you don't care about that part (even though you should).

If someone is illegally residing in a country they should in my view be deported. To be honest I do feel sorry for them but they are breaking the law and should face the consequences. It's also not fair on migrants who respect and abide by migration laws and use legal means to be able to get permission to come to the USA.
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 12:14:28 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 7:07:01 PM, Romaniii wrote:

Is this actually possible? Can Trump really do that?

Ill go through it step by step

-- Ban on Muslim Immigration: use presidential authority over immigration to keep Muslims out on the basis of "threat to national security"

He can, though he'll need Congress to do it. The US in the past has barred immigration based on race, namely from China during the 1800's. He and a GOP dominated congress could put forth a bill barring immigration of Muslims, but they might be sneaky about it and instead list the countries the muslim immigrants come from so that they can label it as barring people from 'The Middle East' rather than Muslims outright, otherwise the law could be challenged as unconstitutional.

-- Mass Deportation: use executive orders to strictly enforce immigration laws that already exist.

He could order it but it would likely not be carried out simply because the government doesnt know where the 11 million illegal immigrants are. They dont all have tracking devices in them somewhere where they all can be rounded up in a week, which would completely shoot down any actual attempt to deport them all.

-- Make Mexico Pay for the Wall : use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to seize billions of $$$ in remittances

This one is purely him blowing smoke up people's a**es. He can build a wall and have the US pay for it and try to spin it that the money they used for it came from Mexico somehow, but he wont be able to have Mexico outright pay for the wall.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 12:29:43 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 8:07:46 PM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 7:31:10 PM, Hayd wrote:
What the living fvck. Being for a ban on Muslim immigration is discriminating people based on their religion, is this no longer a big deal, does this no longer matter anymore? We can ban people from doing things because of their religion. We can favor certain religious groups over others, what the living fvck

Lmao. Would you be okay with temporarily halting ALL immigration instead?

Not in the current situation
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 1:29:33 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 11:39:25 PM, Chloe8 wrote:

If someone is illegally residing in a country they should in my view be deported. To be honest I do feel sorry for them but they are breaking the law and should face the consequences. It's also not fair on migrants who respect and abide by migration laws and use legal means to be able to get permission to come to the USA.

Not all laws are good laws.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 1:36:38 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/6/2016 1:29:33 AM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/5/2016 11:39:25 PM, Chloe8 wrote:

If someone is illegally residing in a country they should in my view be deported. To be honest I do feel sorry for them but they are breaking the law and should face the consequences. It's also not fair on migrants who respect and abide by migration laws and use legal means to be able to get permission to come to the USA.

Not all laws are good laws.

Thats true. So do you support awarding them citizenship?