Posted on 07/30/2015 10:24:36 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Is that a change from a hard-line immigration position, or an endorsement of it? The deport-then-immigrate position has long been the hard-line position on immigration on the Right, although it does have one twist that’s outside the orthodoxy. Donald Trump explained this to CNN’s Dana Bash in an exclusive interview last night, along with his thoughts on health care, which are decidedly less hard-line:
Trump said Wednesday in an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash that as president he would deport all undocumented immigrants and then allow the “good ones” to reenter the country through an “expedited process” and live in the U.S. legally, though not as citizens.
“Legal status,” Trump suggested. “We got to move ‘em out, we’re going to move ‘em back in if they’re really good people.”
For a blustering candidate whose rhetoric has snatched headlines and galvanized a sizable segment of the Republican base, Trump’s comments Wednesday represent his most detailed explanation into what he would do with the estimated 11-plus million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.
He had previously suggested that he favors a “merit-based system,” but did not delve into his support of granting legal status, but not citizenship to undocumented immigrants he calls “the good ones.”
But Trump is still a long ways from presenting a specific immigration policy platform and his explanation in Wednesday’s interview shows a candidate who — despite leading in the polls a week ahead of the first primary debate — is still largely dealing in broad strokes.
John King, Ron Fournier, and Julie Pace discuss this as a departure from a more hard-line approach, focusing on the proposal to expedite the return of those who haven’t committed any other crimes. Putting them at the front of the line might put off some hard-line immigration policy proponents who have argued for years that those emigrating legally should get priority:
Trump’s position will still find favor with most of those who have flocked to his banner on this issue, but it presents two all-but-impossible scenarios. First, deporting 11 million people might be theoretically possible but is completely impractical. It would take an enormous amount of resources for years just to identify those who needed to be deported, let alone the necessary police and court actions to accomplish the deportation, unless Trump and the GOP plan to re-use Mitt Romney’s “self-deportation” argument from 2012, which went over oh so well. At the end of that, then the immigration system would have to focus exclusively on those who got deported rather than those who have waited patiently for the US to get its act together — unless the GOP plans to dump hundreds of billions of dollars more into DHS over the next few years over and above what they will need to spend on securing the border and the deportations themselves.
In other words, this is a budget buster, and will need new revenues — taxes — to fund. A lot more revenue. But Trump hasn’t really shifted his position on immigration, at least not in this interview, so much as he’s fleshed it out a bit more.
Trump also clarifies his position on health care. Not long ago, while in the Democratic Party, Trump endorsed single-payer health care as the best reform, at one time pointing to the Canadian system as a model. He now disavows that position, but talks about the need to expand government provided health care, potentially in the form of subsidies to providers to care for the poor. That’s basically a Medicaid expansion, which isn’t going to find favor with conservatives angry at other candidates like John Kasich for adopting that very approach.
See ya Trump....
You don’t care about preserving this nation when you want to invite millions of lawbreakers and leaches back into the country.
Of course it’s amnesty. They’re even getting expedited, or sent to the front of the line. There’s no more thorough vetting to be done on them while they’re home visiting the family than here in the US. That’s not a rational policy, that gives us 30 million new low-skill, Leftist voters (cause you know they’ll become voters and citizens, whatever the order) who have committed all kinds of felonies as illegals here in the US. We don’t need more low-skill workers—we have more than enough of our own!
But you didn’t answer me. Have you always been for this sort of amnesty—or did Trump’s position talk you into it?
“Round them up and put them on boxcars”
Great idea.
Most got here riding on tops of boxcars.
If it’s good enough to get them here it’s good enough to send them back.
Maybe we can get Planned Parenthood to arrange their transport back to where they came from, one piece at a time.
We can send them through the mail in a refrigerated box.
That way they get to ride inside the boxcar instead of on top.
Make some extra pocket change at the same time.
Left wing freaks shouldn’t have a problem with that.
So we can’t do it now? We have to keep them all forever now?
And it’s more like 33 million than 13 million.
Chain migration will turn that into 99 million.
*Round them up and put them on boxcars then, right? Should we tattoo numbers on their arms as well, just to make it really good?*
Not a bad idea. No one asked them to come here.
Put them on boxcars back to Mexico. Tattoos are a good idea in case they want to sneak back in to murder, steal jobs and rape our citizens who are here legally.
“The only 100% preventable crimes are those committed by illegal aliens
Most of your posts are just making assumptions about the nature of Trump’s program. Obviously, Trump is going to need to give more specifics on how they will be vetted, how the expiditing process will be done, etc. Until then, you’re making worse case scenario assumptions without really having a reason for it.
And no, I am not pro-Amnesty. What candidate are you supporting, by the way? It doesn’t seem there is a candidate with a better plan than this.
By their illegal entry they have shown that they think they are above the law. We have too many already who think that way. I agree, bar them for life.
I think the policy should be, if we have to deport you, you aren’t coming back, period.
Cruz says the opposite. He says legal immigration needs to be greatly reduced. Our infrastructure cannot support the level of immigration we now have much longer.
First ,Eddy is dedicated DC rhino lover who supports massive amnesty and loves Paul Ryan . He was thrilled about Ryan Rubio amnesty plans.
Ed is basically a Rubio-Walker - Jebbie Gope groupie.
Second, Rhino Eddy's hit piece is basically carefully selected sentences lifted from a Trump interview with Hannity which I Watched,
Ed is a liar and distorting Trump comments. Trump came down pretty hard and said everyone goes back and reapplies to grt in.No exceptions. Why Eddy is teisting his word is because its a hit piece for three DC establishment groupies he supports. The Hot-gas blog is run by Gope gas bag bloggerswhere the Libs Gooers spin for the the RubioWalkerJebbie slave labor cartel. Believe nothing from those con artist bloggers.
More like 30, but yeah you’re right. We should just give up.
That’s the old can’t-do American’t spirit.
Your screen name is a good fit.
GOOD ILLEGALS...... what a concept....
Trumps combover is growing into his brain.. PITY..
Good criminals, Bad criminals requires a fine sense of Moonbatery..
I don’t want, nor do we need, every uneducated, third world person that wants to stay or come here. I wish we had an immigration system closer to Australia’s. Merit based.
Having said that, this is still closer to what we want than any other politician has articulated.
I see this guy Morrissey is slanting the truth quite a bit. Actually Trump wants the private and healthy healthcare system to help out the poor. A charity type program.
Trump here lets Dana Bash put words in his mouth without correction as he goes on.
Trump was interviewed in detail and without interruption by the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board on or about 29th June for over an hour. Trump speaks about his plan for healthcare; see around the 55 minute mark in the Tribune video linked below.
Trump talked going back to a free and private healthcare system; removing state lines for healthcare and gives an example for a better deal in another state; taking care of people who are without insurance by hospitals working with other hospitals and says this will mostly be private so not government; and it won’t be as good as people paying for insurance, but he believes it could be pretty good. 'Removing state lines' means the consumer can buy health insurance in any other state besides the state of residents.
Yeah he is being biased. See post #34 that explains Trump on healthcare.
But it's never going to happen. I don't know who you support for prez but none of those guys have gone so far as to commit to what you want. Thus far, Trump has made the most dramatic statements, and if he gets the nod, I'll vote for him. If Cruz is the nominee, I'll vote for him.
But what you and I want, it's never going to happen. Just saying.
why do we need anymore immigrants? we are full. as to how you deport 40 million illegals, mass sweeps of certain areas and the rest will get the message. also very heavy fines for hiring illegals.
I”m not making any assumptions beyond what he’s said.
Cruz may have a marginally better plan, but he’s pro-amnesty too.
Really we need someone who isn’t, but the GOPe does too good a job of keeping anyone not with their program out.
You’re correct. Trump has credibility to get things done that the voters sees in his successful mega businesses. The whole DC beltway crowd has no credibility and of course that includes the GOP. Voters see the professional politicians, all of them, as controlled by their party bosses that will do nothing to stop illegal immigration. Trump being the outsider does not have that problem.
Interesting to note that Trump and Sanders are in rough agreement. Others settle on some level of amnesty.
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.