I LOVE Donald Trump

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
That's not going to happen. Period. Get over it and start considering more realistic ways to address this issue.

From what I read, many prominent judges and legal scholars do not think it'd require an amendment. It could be challenged by the USC, but overall it seems like it could be done.

Hell, even Harry Reid pushed for it in the 90s. Wonder if somebody punched him so hard then that he almost lost an eye, and changed his mind. Forcefully.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,160
1,634
126
3.) Trump takes off his rubber "human" face mask and reveals that he is in fact a killing machine sent into the past to defeat the Hillarybot. The Hillarybot unloads an EMP Pulse aimed at the Trumpbot, but, the Trumpbot is too quick, and his deflector shield pulses just in time to neutralize the threat. Hillarybot will then dive off the stage, and flee the scene, to life and fight again another day. Trumpbot will buy out the entire inventory of the ice cream truck when it drives by, and he will give all the kids ice cream, because, hey, hes Donald frickin Trump.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,130
13,687
136
I just realized there are a few paths.

1) Trump gets the R nomination

This will result in:
1a) He looses
1b) He wins and gets assassinated

OR
2) Trump gets no R nomination

Then:
2a) He enters election ass Independant. Takes enough R votes to let the D party win. Then he definitely gets the R nomination for 2018.

Trump has the R party by the balls! (1b is somewhat sarcastic). He basically has it so the R party has to nominate him or the R party will loose no matter what type of situation. That's why all the other Rs are desperate to steer the conversation away from Trump.

Why is there no 1c, where he wins and does not get assassinated?
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,877
36,871
136
From what I read, many prominent judges and legal scholars do not think it'd require an amendment. It could be challenged by the USC, but overall it seems like it could be done.

Hell, even Harry Reid pushed for it in the 90s. Wonder if somebody punched him so hard then that he almost lost an eye, and changed his mind. Forcefully.

Even if congress managed to pass a law covering this (extremely doubtful) a federal court would issue an immediate injunction preventing it from going into effect while the case is fought out. Given precedent and the current makeup of the Supreme Court the law would certainly be found to be unconstitutional. Not to mention that the mechanisms to actually enforce his plan would run up against multiple other parts of the constitution and existing US law. It would be so mired in different, well founded, legal challenges that it would effectively never happen.

The idea that his "program" can be accomplished with anything short of an amendment is so wildly optimistic that it's essentially delusional.
 

CitizenKain

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2000
4,480
14
76
Yes, they did break the law. But you're going to have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law for each and every single one of them individually.

The 'deport them all' rhetoric is unrealistic. We can't just round up every one who looks like an illegal and ship them south.

Because if someone is dumb enough to want to vote for trump, they are dumb enough to think you can just shove 11 million people across a border and call it a day.

trump supporters would be more then happy to just err on the side of "looks like a mexican", no court necessary.
 

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
155
106
Tell that to young americans who can't get a job.

My deepest sympathies to the those with a small mind who think that it's illegal immigrants who are "stealing our jobs".

Bow to your master Donald Trump with his glorious idea to build a wall between Mexico and Texas.

And let's just ignore that WAY more jobs are gone because of entirely legal off-shoring and manufacturing in 3rld world countries.

Obviously, my explanation that Trump doesn't address this REAL issue is that he can't.

Because as a republican and conservative he CAN NOT address the problem of offshoring and outsourcing, because any limitation/penalization etc. would mean imposing limits for companies. And of course this contradicts what conservatives stand for. Can you see a conservative who would tell businesses and corporates that he'd be making a law to tax ALL companies who outsource (to cut costs --> more profits), say 25% or 30%? Lol..because I can't :) But here is a tip: You can do whatever you want, build a 100ft wall and give yourself to the illusion...jobs are still getting lost and your car is still being made in Mexico and your clothes in China because companies will off-shore and out-manufacture with a wall in Texas or without.

And you fools happily keep believing in how Jose from Tijuana steals your jobs....I just keep laughing.
 
Last edited:

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
155
106
Also, if you actually learned something, graduated, acquired skills and you do not get a job..it's not because of illegals.

Illegals don't get hired as software programmers, doctors or ANY "higher level" job. Illegals are usually in the lowest paying "helper" jobs, factory workers etc. where they often get paid less than mix. wage under the table.

So if you're a graduate or have any acquired skills and actual qualification in a field and you blame illegals that they took your job you're fool too. You just prove you know NOTHING about economics and what is really going on.
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,235
2
0
That's not going to happen. Period. Get over it and start considering more realistic ways to address this issue.

From what I read, many prominent judges and legal scholars do not think it'd require an amendment. It could be challenged by the USC, but overall it seems like it could be done.

Hell, even Harry Reid pushed for it in the 90s. Wonder if somebody punched him so hard then that he almost lost an eye, and changed his mind. Forcefully.

Even if congress managed to pass a law covering this (extremely doubtful) a federal court would issue an immediate injunction preventing it from going into effect while the case is fought out. Given precedent and the current makeup of the Supreme Court the law would certainly be found to be unconstitutional. Not to mention that the mechanisms to actually enforce his plan would run up against multiple other parts of the constitution and existing US law. It would be so mired in different, well founded, legal challenges that it would effectively never happen.

The idea that his "program" can be accomplished with anything short of an amendment is so wildly optimistic that it's essentially delusional.

The political and legal mechanisms are already fully in place to achieve a mass deportation without any jurisdictional or constitutional interference what so ever. Because these once cherished and now virtually banished "civil rights" have all been steadily chipped away at one bad bill (with 1000's of bad laws per bill) at a time. And all those bad laws that are constantly piled on the tops of other bad laws have systematically eroded any personal rights or liberties to the point of meaninglessness now.

With one hand exposed, a politician wanting to get elected will wave the constitution and the flag around over their head just to get votes, while the other hand is hidden away from view behind the podium while they change and erase all of its original meaning mostly to suit a business interest for a potential profit at some point.

Look at the recent Texas bill that made it illegal to spy on a corporation that was already breaking the law by using a drone unless you had the corporations permission to film them breaking the law, first. So the big business interest politicians instead punish the pesky whistle blowers who are hurting all that corrupt corporate profit and stuff. Most career politicians are well past even bothering to pretend to protect a voters interests at this point when it comes to fast tracking and rubber stamping institutionalized corporate corruption.
 
Last edited:

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Also, if you actually learned something, graduated, acquired skills and you do not get a job..it's not because of illegals.

Illegals don't get hired as software programmers, doctors or ANY "higher level" job. Illegals are usually in the lowest paying "helper" jobs, factory workers etc. where they often get paid less than mix. wage under the table.

So if you're a graduate or have any acquired skills and actual qualification in a field and you blame illegals that they took your job you're fool too. You just prove you know NOTHING about economics and what is really going on.

Yes, because all people have to go to college. That's right, there is no student loan problem.

No, illegals don't get hired as programmers, h1bs do, which is another factor in his plan.
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,278
89
91
I actually think immigration is good for the long term demographics of the country. We don't want to become like Japan. And considering the declining birthrate in developed nations immigration is actually a good thing for the long term. Yes it drains our resources initially. But eventually they will be contributing.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
My deepest sympathies to the those with a small mind who think that it's illegal immigrants who are "stealing our jobs".

Bow to your master Donald Trump with his glorious idea to build a wall between Mexico and Texas.

And let's just ignore that WAY more jobs are gone because of entirely legal off-shoring and manufacturing in 3rld world countries.

Obviously, my explanation that Trump doesn't address this REAL issue is that he can't.

Because as a republican and conservative he CAN NOT address the problem of offshoring and outsourcing, because any limitation/penalization etc. would mean imposing limits for companies. And of course this contradicts what conservatives stand for. Can you see a conservative who would tell businesses and corporates that he'd be making a law to tax ALL companies who outsource (to cut costs --> more profits), say 25% or 30%? Lol..because I can't :) But here is a tip: You can do whatever you want, build a 100ft wall and give yourself to the illusion...jobs are still getting lost and your car is still being made in Mexico and your clothes in China because companies will off-shore and out-manufacture with a wall in Texas or without.

And you fools happily keep believing in how Jose from Tijuana steals your jobs....I just keep laughing.
Gotta love some twat like you pretending you know economics.

Let me ask you this - how does Vietnam, Indonesia, China and many other countries get to be cheaper than the us constsntly, regardless of the buildup in foreign currency reserves of a specific trading partner with long running trade deficits?

Why, a manipulated currency of course. That and non reciprocal trade agreements that do not allow free flow of trade.

Go read up some more about economics and international trade before you blather on about something you have no fucking clue about.


Illegals take lower skilled jobs. Jobs that go to lower skilled people, young kids, and young adults. Unemployment in those groups sucks. Why? Because illegals.

Ask any contractor who doesn't hire illegals what it has done to their business. Roofers, plumbers, eletricians, drywallers, deck builders, landscapers. All fucked.

14% of California construction workers are illegals.

Nobody that is legal wants to become a drywaller or construction worker, eh?
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,278
89
91
Also, if you actually learned something, graduated, acquired skills and you do not get a job..it's not because of illegals.

Illegals don't get hired as software programmers, doctors or ANY "higher level" job. Illegals are usually in the lowest paying "helper" jobs, factory workers etc. where they often get paid less than mix. wage under the table.

So if you're a graduate or have any acquired skills and actual qualification in a field and you blame illegals that they took your job you're fool too. You just prove you know NOTHING about economics and what is really going on.

I figure most people in the same field and same job for 10 years know nothing about economics.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
I actually think immigration is good for the long term demographics of the country. We don't want to become like Japan. And considering the declining birthrate in developed nations immigration is actually a good thing for the long term. Yes it drains our resources initially. But eventually they will be contributing.
Immigration is a great thing. As long as it is rational and controlled as not to flood a job market and put American jobs at significant risk. All countries have found that legal immigration of educated and hard working people benefits innovation.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,503
50,657
136
Gotta love some twat like you pretending you know economics.

Let me ask you this - how does Vietnam, Indonesia, China and many other countries get to be cheaper than the us constsntly, regardless of the buildup in foreign currency reserves of a specific trading partner with long running trade deficits?

Why, a manipulated currency of course. That and non reciprocal trade agreements that do not allow free flow of trade.

Go read up some more about economics and international trade before you blather on about something you have no fucking clue about.

Illegals take lower skilled jobs. Jobs that go to lower skilled people, young kids, and young adults. Unemployment in those groups sucks. Why? Because illegals.

Ask any contractor who doesn't hire illegals what it has done to their business. Roofers, plumbers, eletricians, drywallers, deck builders, landscapers. All fucked.

14% of California construction workers are illegals.

Nobody that is legal wants to become a drywaller or construction worker, eh?

China isn't really relevant to this discussion right now as it's currency is overvalued, not undervalued.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,503
50,657
136
Well now you really don't know that, do you?

It is extremely likely that in the current situation if the Chinese government were to allow the renminbi to float it would decline in value. On the issue of China's currency like most other things, Trump was babbling about something he's clueless about.

I guess that's sort of his thing though, haha.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
It is extremely likely that in the current situation if the Chinese government were to allow the renminbi to float it would decline in value. On the issue of China's currency like most other things, Trump was babbling about something he's clueless about.

I guess that's sort of his thing though, haha.
You have no basis for that, nobody does. You cant account for foreign currency reserves, inflows (or outflows) or a number of other factors to say where it would be vs various other currencies, including the dollar, at any given point in time. Furthermore, even if the currency were to depreciate today, it likely would appreciate it the future when we need it to, but will still have no process in place to deal with them. The damage has largely been done and people like you are happy to let it keep going.

Like most things you say, you ignore multiple factors and the long term effect of currency arbitrage. You're more than happy to let them manipulate away.

Funny how you care more about illegals and communist China than you do about your own countrymen.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,503
50,657
136
You have no basis for that, nobody does. You cant account for foreign currency reserves, inflows (or outflows) or a number of other factors to say where it would be vs various other currencies, including the dollar, at any given point in time.

The PBOC just intervened to prop up the value of their currency, literally last week. Their real effective exchange rate has increased by about 30% over the last 4 years. Furthermore, I didn't pinpoint where it would end up, I just said it would fall. I'm very comfortable with that.

Furthermore, even if the currency were to depreciate today, it likely would appreciate it the future when we need it to, but will still have no process in place to deal with them. The damage has largely been done and people like you are happy to let it keep going.

Of course I wouldn't be, but Trump's ignorant ranting on the subject isn't helping. He just sounds stupid when he does things like this.

Like most thins you say, you ignore multiple factors and the long term effect of currency arbitrage.

Nope, just letting you know that the 'China's currency is being held too low' thing is likely inaccurate.
Funny how you care more about illegals and communist China than you do about your own countrymen.

Yeah, that's it.