Immigration laws

User avatar
Omar Bongo
Posts: 9083
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:59 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Omar Bongo » Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:02 am

People elected him president, largely because the one you preferred was correctly identified as a corrupt, devious thug

Nope. Electors elected him President...PP was with the clear majority of people who preferred the "corrupt, devious thug" to Trump

Interesting, no?
"Trump is what he is, a floundering, inarticulate jumble of gnawing insecurities and not-at-all compensating vanities, which is pathetic."
George Will

"How stupid is our country?"
Donald Trump

cruiser
Posts: 2980
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:42 pm

Re: Immigration laws

Post by cruiser » Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:52 am

Omar - do you think we need to change the election process to national popular vote only
and do away with the will of the founding fathers?

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24566
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Wabash » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:19 am

I do. The Electoral College was designed to allow the rural southern states to keep slaves. Hardly a noble purpose.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

Reconquista Primero
Posts: 878
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:41 am

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Reconquista Primero » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:28 am

I think the "do away with the will of the founding fathers" is a bit of a red herring. The founding fathers put 2 different mechanisms in the Constitution for changing it. They obviously anticipated that the need might arise, but made it very difficult to institute change. Did the nation "do away with the will of the founding fathers" when the Constitution was amended to allow women the right to vote?
As to the Electoral College, I am neither here nor there. Perhaps an adjustment to have the state votes cast based on the percentage given to each candidate in that state. I think a state or two already does this, but I am too lazy to look it up.
Because I am not optimistic for 2020, I think I'll leave my signature alone.
Worst choices for president in my 35 + years of voting.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19754
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by John Q. Public » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:45 am

WTF? Where'd you get that one, Wabash? Sounds like something some Bizarro Breitbart would make up. At the time it was conceived, all states had slavery and very few colonists had any problems with it. The EC was designed to reduce the influence of the more populous states but the far more important issues at the time were religion and the various region's definitions of "democracy" and "freedom."
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24566
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Wabash » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:57 am

The EC was put in place to keep the more populous North states from steamrolling the less populous South states. The issue of most concern in the South states was slavery.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

Tommy Tar
Posts: 1609
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:32 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Tommy Tar » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:59 am

They use the word reform so they can't be pinned down on their ideas.

Were going to build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for the wall. =D>

You can't reform anything until it's under control. If we just enforce our current immigration laws most people would be happy. ](*,)
‘I Haven’t Seen Democrats This Mad Since We Freed the Slaves!’..... Rob Schneider.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19754
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by John Q. Public » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:07 am

Wabash wrote:The issue of most concern in the South states was slavery.
Maybe in another 50 years, but at the time the Article was written, the other issues and defining the President's role were far more pressing.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24566
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Wabash » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:16 am

Slavery was a huge issue when both the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were being written. DoI makes no mention of it, and Constitution barely addresses it.

The North initially proposed a direct national election of the president. But the South led by James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South. The right of suffrage was much more extensive in the Northern than the Southern States. The latter could have no influence in the election on the score of slaves (African Americans). In a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College (a prototype of which the South proposed) instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.

Guess which state was the big winner at that time? Virginia.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19754
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by John Q. Public » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:22 am

Tommy Tar wrote:If we just enforce our current immigration laws most people would be happy.
I read an article a couple days ago that said that "enforcing out current immigration laws" as Trump fans would define it would result in, I think it said, a 3% drop in our GDP. Like it or not, illegals are a big part of our national output. I'll post more if I remember to when I have more time.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 1855
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm

Re: Immigration laws

Post by ShiftyMutt » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:38 am

Has anyone heard how he thinks Mexico would pay for it?

Buy the materials from a company there, have Mexican citizens build it then stiff them like he apparently has of his other workers? I've just never heard an explanation other than "believe me".

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Immigration laws

Post by MDDad » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:43 am

John, you’re right in that almost every state had slaves at the time the Constitution was written. Massachusetts had none, but the other seven northern states all had slaves, and New York had almost as many as Georgia.

Sometimes it’s almost a full-time job separating the truth from things Wabash posts as fact from a quick reading of Wikipedia. Slavery was only a peripheral issue at the time because it had to be determined how slave populations would factor into a state’s electoral college numbers. It’s moral repugnance or abolition were never a factor in the discussions.

Also, there was no concern specifically with northern states “steamrolling” southern ones. Rather, the concern was about larger states having too much influence over smaller ones, but that argument revolved as much around Delaware and Rhode Island as it did Georgia. And finally, even with slave populations discounted by 40%, Virginia was still the largest state in the union, and North Carolina and Maryland were also in the top half.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19754
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by John Q. Public » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:50 am

Guess which state was the big winner at that time? Virginia.
Virginia wasn't considered "the South" at the time. The ruling elite in Virginia were more concerned about restricting the influence of the working class and the "uncivilized" Scots-Irish in the western part of the state, both of which outnumbered them. The "slave economy" didn't become a big issue until the next century.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24566
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Wabash » Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:51 am

MDDad could you cite your sources on that? I didn't use Wikipedia.

In a direct election, the South would have lost every time.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Immigration laws

Post by MDDad » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:19 am

Wabash wrote:In a direct election, the South would have lost every time.
I have no idea what that means, for at least two reasons.

First, as John as pointed out, the concept of the South, as opposed to the North, didn’t exist at the time. The political philosophies and values that marked the differences between those regions didn’t come along until almost a half century later. So I don’t know what you mean by the South.

Second, the South didn’t run for the office of president, so when you say "the South would have lost every time”, it has no clear meaning. Do you mean men that the later South would have supported? Or men who were born in the South? Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe were all born in Virginia, and Jackson in North Carolina. So for the first 40 years of the republic, didn’t the South actually disprove your contention? You have to be more clear and precise when you try to make your point.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24566
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Wabash » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:21 am

Lol. Now you're just playing stupid. Nice try.

What is the source of your claim regarding the South and that slavery was not a primary issue?
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Immigration laws

Post by MDDad » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:31 am

Wabash wrote:Now you're just playing stupid.
At least I have to play at it. For some it just comes naturally.

I'll ask again, what do you mean by "the South would have lost every time"?

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19754
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by John Q. Public » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:38 am

Most any history book.

Really, your claim is about as historically incorrect as saying that the EC was conceived to limit the power of Republicans or Chevy drivers.

MDD, I'm sure somebody at Wikipedia would have caught that one. It couldn't be that inaccurate.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24566
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Immigration laws

Post by Wabash » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:42 am

I derived my opinion by reading the writings of numerous historians.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

MDDad
Posts: 12125
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Immigration laws

Post by MDDad » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:44 am

Of course you do.

Take your beating like a man.

Post Reply