Posted on 10/10/2017 11:21:04 PM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
A month ago, liberals were celebrating a sudden deal on “Dreamers” that President Trump made with congressional Democrats. Chuck Schumer, the senate minority leader, was downright giddy when a hot mic later caught him gloating that Trump “likes me.”
Now the wedding is off, the bromance kaput, and a new deal will have to be made. Blame it on the wall.
Trump’s bid for bipartisanship was the talk of Washington, especially after he confirmed the outlines himself, including the fact that funding for his signature wall on the border with Mexico would “come later.” But somewhere along the line, the man who wrote the “Art of the Deal” realized he had made a classically bad bargain.
Trump gave away too much, and got almost nothing in return. Dems got protections for the 800,000 “Dreamers,” who were brought to America illegally as minors, yet the president got no Dem votes on the repeal of ObamaCare, tax reform or anything else on his agenda.
Most important, Trump’s willingness to exclude funding for the wall was seen as a betrayal by many of his core supporters, people who had voted for him precisely because of his tough immigration stance. Nothing says tough like the wall.
There is a wall and high fencing along portions of the border, and although a wall along the entire border would be impractical and wildly expensive, Trump’s repeated promises to build it–and have Mexico pay for it — became a ringing example of the commitment to change he represented.
Take away that promise, and the deal with the Dems could be mocked as business as usual, or “amnesty first, border security never.” It looked as if Trump had joined those in Washington of both parties who, despite modest differences, fundamentally believe in lax borders if not open borders.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Not plane loads, bus loads, they came from the nation of Mexico, send ‘em back, cheap and quick.
If we're concerned about there not being enough people to pick lettuce, then we can have two lines: those who want to work backbreaking jobs, and those that want to come here to start a career.
There are many stories of illegals who find ways to go back and forth across the border as they please in order to rejoin with family during the holidays, etc.
So the idea that sending them back is onerous is BS.
Considering that a GOP majority is the only thing standing between Trump and impeachment, he needs to keep the base energized. And that means no amnesty between now and Election Day.
Sure, you can send the good ones back. It's just better to send the bad ones back first.
It’s interesting the their home countries don’t even want the “good ones” back. According to our politicians, these “good ones” are the cream of the crop. Far superior to American citizens...yet their home country doesn’t want them.
What does that tell you?
What does that tell you?
That Mexican officials are racist. They don't want the brown-skinned Mexicans back. True.
Compared to the $6 trillion we've spent in Iraq or the $25 trillion we've spent on welfare since LBJ was president? I don't think so.
“along the entire border would be impractical”
“entire”
it’s been pointed out in other articles in run up to election 2016 that some terrain along the border is not suitable for a wall.
the writer made one sentence to cover two points - the impracticalness of a full wall due to terrain, and - the (wildly expensive) cost of a full wall or wall in some areas and deterrent in rough terrain areas.
imo - thats how i understand the portion of sentence you were questioning
No .. those countries just kicked them out .
No issues .
Just leave .o /> They here illegally and taking Americans jobs , end of story.
Kick them out just like a Mexico would .
Trump is a fool for even playing the game .
There is no crisis .
Get back to real issues like taxes or healthcare .
Stop worrying about Ivanka and Jared lib Manhattan ideas .
Those two will get him impeached .
” But somewhere along the line, the man who wrote the “Art of the Deal” realized he had made a classically bad bargain.”
I’m not so sure Trump was that stupid in appearing to reverse himself on the Wall. He knows full well that the Wall (and what it represented) was the main symbol of his campaign and what energized his voters more than everything else combined.
Put yourself in the shoes of Pelosi or even more, Luis. They went off telling their Hispanic base that all their dreams were going to come true with Trump - Amnesty for what would be millions of people, and no wall, and no immigration limits. Obviously their people got very excited and got their hopes up.
Now Pelosi and company have to go back to those same people and say, “whoops, sorry, it was a misunderstanding, forget what we said earlier”.
I suspect their base wasn’t too happy with the reversal and is now pushing them, big-time, to cut a deal with Trump. Give him his damn wall, immigration limits, and whatever other crap he wants - but MAKE US DREAMERS LEGAL. In other words, Trump may wind up getting most of his 70 points on immigration in the end, by using this tactic of tremendously raising hopes...and taking advantage of the pressure applied by the Left to agree to something, anything.
Anyway, that’s my take. As I see it, if Trump can get the RAISE Act through (pretty much ending chain migration and 3rd World migration) and can build the wall and increase the number of people on the border, in exchange for no more than 800,000 ‘dreamers’ we come out way ahead - although I know that many here would not agree with me...but that is my take - I think we’re worse doing nothing (and thus allowing the very high levels of 3rd World immigration to continue) is much worse than legalizing the Dreamers.
I'll take it a step further. Anyone who benefited from obama unconstitutional, illegal actions should have those benefits stripped and pay reparations.
Trump compromised... he took the first step to compromise... a big step that left some supporters scratching their heads.
Pelosi-Schumer refused to do any compromise on their part. They are accustomed to the McConnell-Boehner-Hastert-Lott style compromises where only one side compromises and not both sides.
Those who argue for compromise should take note.
Every inch of the wall must be complete before any deals made. Trump is repeating the 86 mistake of wall funding for amnesty. Why not start the deal when the last inch of the wall is complete. Or it’s 1986 all over again.
You seem to overlook one very often part of the promise. The Mexicans will pay for the wall.
Show me the money or forget the wall
“Trump’s willingness to exclude funding for the wall was seen as a betrayal by many of his core supporters, people who had voted for him precisely because of his tough immigration stance.”
This is the heart of the Trump presidency. If he wants to be successful, and if he wants to be re-elected, he will follow through vigorously with his promise to end illegal immigration. If he doesn’t, his presidency will fail completely and he will not be re-elected.
It’s pretty much that simple.
Build The Wall! It’s the only way to protect us from future political treachery.
A deal between two parties requires each satisfying a requirement. If one refuses there is no deal. Schummer refuses to do his part but expects the President to do his. That’s not the way it works.
In any case the DACA Dreamers benefit is winding down....last week wea the last chance for dreamers to re-new their status.....and many didn't
Meanwhile no new dreamers can be signed up
Result...DACA winding down
Trump snookered the Dreamers and the Dims.
Bigly WIN for all deplorables.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.