RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

At some point, adults need to make better decisions and not live beyond their means. That is not Donald Trump's job.

---

go bears!

Johnny Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Mothra said:

---

sombear said:

---

I said and posted on here for months prior to the election that for the first time in my life I wasn't going to vote for the GOP candidate. I changed my mind last minute based on all the pro-Hamas BS by the Dems and crazy Green Deal BS from Kamala.

I regret my vote. The reason I was not going to vote for Trump was long term v. short term. No doubt, Trump was going to be better short term than Kamala - from a traditional conservate perspective. My concern was long term. And my concerns have proven justified.

I believe long term Trump has severely damaged: the GOP, conservatism, free markets, separation of powers, our Country's reputation, ally and international relations, global security, international freedom movements, among others. I also am angry that he single-handedly has forever precluded any argument that character or the most basic level of decency matters. Laughing about "mean tweets" has turned into rationalizing or even relishing bizarre and abhorrent behavior.

I say without reservation that conservatism and decency would have been better off long term with a disastrous Kamala presidency. It would have galvanized the best of our country against liberalism and cultural debauchery.

I was wrong.

---

You're one of the most thoughtful posters on this board, and I don't disagree much with your assessment of Trump.

Where I think you err is you greatly underestimate the amount of irreversible damage that would have been done to our country by another 4 years of the Biden admin. There's a strong likelihood that Harris would have attempted to pack the Supreme Court, ala FDR, to get her agenda passed. And of course a perpetuation of open borders, gender issues, identity politics, cracking down on free speech, political prosecutions, and foreign affair blunders would have undoubtedly been a total disaster, doing lasting damage to our country.

Republicans had crappy options, including Trump. But when it's crappy vs. evil, you better choose crappy.

---

Kamala would have had a GOP House and Senate, so short damage would have been mitigated.

She would not have touched the Court.

1A - Trump has been worse than Kamala would have been. (Threatening or even suing law firms, companies, media, judges; saying it should be treasonous to teach anything anti-American in schools; suing banks for de-banking him; firing or endorsing firing of gov employees over their views.)

Trump has been WORSE on foreign policy than I think Kamala would have been. Kamala would have supported Israel and would have been much stronger for Ukraine. She likely would not have bombed Iran (so I give that issue to Trump). She would not have invaded Venezuela or bombed boats (so I give her the edge there).

She definitely would not have mistreated and in some cases threatened our closest allies, issued tariffs, etc.

She would not have been so cozy with Russia or China.

Trump's political prosecutions (or threats) are just as bad, and he is more directly involved.

Credit Trump bigly on the border, but he's also gone too far.

I also credit Trump for speaking out against wokeness, etc., but there was already a major backlash in the making there.

---

Ridiculous case of a short memory

A. Harris would have continued Biden's horribly destructive immigration flood
B. Would have continued Biden's bizarre / destructive woke policies
C. Would have continued Biden's indifference to the fentanyl crises
D. Would have INCREASED Taxes. Where Trump has provided tax relief
E. The Middle East would still be in turmoil from Iran's nuclear bomb program
F. NATO would not have increased their defense spending
G Lawfare against Christians would have not only continued….but made worse.
H. Ridiculous green regulations would have continued to hamper economic growth.
I. Implicit discrimination against white people would have increased.
J. Military recruitment and morale would have continued to plummet.



Gone too far ?
How ?

You prefer to have these criminals remain on our streets ?

How many more have to be raped or murdered before you finally wake up ?

Or will it take the killing of a family member by a drunk driving illegal to finally insert a sense of reality into your insulated world ?

---

Good summary. In short, we (and for that matter of the world) would be presently suffering through the fourth term of Obama with the main over-arching goal being doing anything and everything to insure permanent leftist democrat dominance both now and (especially) in the future - the country, the American people, and the world be damned.

---

not correct. You obviously don't travel. The rest of the world doesn't need us and it is apparent. We ain
t what we used to be. Most people of note in the world want nothing to do with Merca, by god! We lost are way.

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Mothra said:

---

sombear said:

---

I said and posted on here for months prior to the election that for the first time in my life I wasn't going to vote for the GOP candidate. I changed my mind last minute based on all the pro-Hamas BS by the Dems and crazy Green Deal BS from Kamala.

I regret my vote. The reason I was not going to vote for Trump was long term v. short term. No doubt, Trump was going to be better short term than Kamala - from a traditional conservate perspective. My concern was long term. And my concerns have proven justified.

I believe long term Trump has severely damaged: the GOP, conservatism, free markets, separation of powers, our Country's reputation, ally and international relations, global security, international freedom movements, among others. I also am angry that he single-handedly has forever precluded any argument that character or the most basic level of decency matters. Laughing about "mean tweets" has turned into rationalizing or even relishing bizarre and abhorrent behavior.

I say without reservation that conservatism and decency would have been better off long term with a disastrous Kamala presidency. It would have galvanized the best of our country against liberalism and cultural debauchery.

I was wrong.

---

You're one of the most thoughtful posters on this board, and I don't disagree much with your assessment of Trump.

Where I think you err is you greatly underestimate the amount of irreversible damage that would have been done to our country by another 4 years of the Biden admin. There's a strong likelihood that Harris would have attempted to pack the Supreme Court, ala FDR, to get her agenda passed. And of course a perpetuation of open borders, gender issues, identity politics, cracking down on free speech, political prosecutions, and foreign affair blunders would have undoubtedly been a total disaster, doing lasting damage to our country.

Republicans had crappy options, including Trump. But when it's crappy vs. evil, you better choose crappy.

---

Kamala would have had a GOP House and Senate, so short damage would have been mitigated.

She would not have touched the Court.

1A - Trump has been worse than Kamala would have been. (Threatening or even suing law firms, companies, media, judges; saying it should be treasonous to teach anything anti-American in schools; suing banks for de-banking him; firing or endorsing firing of gov employees over their views.)

Trump has been WORSE on foreign policy than I think Kamala would have been. Kamala would have supported Israel and would have been much stronger for Ukraine. She likely would not have bombed Iran (so I give that issue to Trump). She would not have invaded Venezuela or bombed boats (so I give her the edge there).

She definitely would not have mistreated and in some cases threatened our closest allies, issued tariffs, etc.

She would not have been so cozy with Russia or China.

Trump's political prosecutions (or threats) are just as bad, and he is more directly involved.

Credit Trump bigly on the border, but he's also gone too far.

I also credit Trump for speaking out against wokeness, etc., but there was already a major backlash in the making there.

---

Ridiculous case of a short memory

A. Harris would have continued Biden's horribly destructive immigration flood
B. Would have continued Biden's bizarre / destructive woke policies
C. Would have continued Biden's indifference to the fentanyl crises
D. Would have INCREASED Taxes. Where Trump has provided tax relief
E. The Middle East would still be in turmoil from Iran's nuclear bomb program
F. NATO would not have increased their defense spending
G Lawfare against Christians would have not only continued….but made worse.
H. Ridiculous green regulations would have continued to hamper economic growth.
I. Implicit discrimination against white people would have increased.
J. Military recruitment and morale would have continued to plummet.



Gone too far ?
How ?

You prefer to have these criminals remain on our streets ?

How many more have to be raped or murdered before you finally wake up ?

Or will it take the killing of a family member by a drunk driving illegal to finally insert a sense of reality into your insulated world ?

---

stop with the Biden Haris nonsense. this 100% the pig man show.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I ammost concerned about our deteriorated relationships with our best allies.

---

What is happening is a reassessment of who our best allies actually are. The UK arrests 30 people a day - 12000 a year - for thought crime. This isn't an ally, this is North Korea. The EU, with notable exceptions like Hungary and perhaps Italy, is no better. These aren't the same countries we allied with in World War 2. Their laws, culture, and demographics are completely different.

Realitybites said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I ammost concerned about our deteriorated relationships with our best allies.

---

What is happening is a reassessment of who our best allies actually are. The UK arrests 30 people a day - 12000 a year - for thought crime. This isn't an ally, this is North Korea. The EU, with notable exceptions like Hungary and perhaps Italy, is no better. These aren't the same countries we allied with in World War 2. Their laws, culture, and demographics are completely different.

---

Bingo

Countries change.

Sometimes rapidly and dramatically.
Great Britain, Ireland, Canada, Sweden, and France are some obvious examples.

Biden and the Dems attempted to flood the US with millions of 3rd world illegals ( at taxpayers expense ) and forever alter the traditional culture of the US. Trump is almost single handedly attempting to remove the millions of illegals involved.

However the legacy media and its misrepresentations are working against him.

J.R. said:

---

Serious question. Not intended on a big fight over Trump. That POS ain't worth my time any longer.

---

Why "support" the guy?

1. He's "The Guy" right now. I hoped for better but this is what the GOP gave and our culture, including governance thinking, produced.

2. There was no viable alternative on the DEM ballot. As difficult as it is to even imagine, Harris and Walz collectively couldn't have set tone and given direction beyond that of a draining sink.

3. Trump is out in a couple of years. Welcome to rodeo government: we have to try to stay on that bronc another 8 seconds.


Biggest issue is Justice and the legal system integrity and adhering to the Constitution and law. I wonder when or if our lawyers will realize that they are the foremost security in preserving the nation.

drahthaar said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Serious question. Not intended on a big fight over Trump. That POS ain't worth my time any longer.

---

Biggest issue is Justice and the legal system integrity and adhering to the Constitution and law. I wonder when or if our lawyers will realize that they are the foremost security in preserving the nation.

---

Trump realizes it and has planned his attacks accordingly.

Realitybites said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I ammost concerned about our deteriorated relationships with our best allies.

---

What is happening is a reassessment of who our best allies actually are. The UK arrests 30 people a day - 12000 a year - for thought crime. This isn't an ally, this is North Korea. The EU, with notable exceptions like Hungary and perhaps Italy, is no better. These aren't the same countries we allied with in World War 2. Their laws, culture, and demographics are completely different.

---

Hungary? You do realize Hungary is Authoritarian? Italy? Also concerns of Authoritarianism...

Are we seeing a pattern here?

KaiBear said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I ammost concerned about our deteriorated relationships with our best allies.

---

What is happening is a reassessment of who our best allies actually are. The UK arrests 30 people a day - 12000 a year - for thought crime. This isn't an ally, this is North Korea. The EU, with notable exceptions like Hungary and perhaps Italy, is no better. These aren't the same countries we allied with in World War 2. Their laws, culture, and demographics are completely different.

---

Bingo

Countries change.

Sometimes rapidly and dramatically.
Great Britain, Ireland, Canada, Sweden, and France are some obvious examples.

---

I thought that Ireland was one of your top dream destinations to relocate if Kamala had won the election? Maybe I misunderstood.

Sam Lowry said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Serious question. Not intended on a big fight over Trump. That POS ain't worth my time any longer.

---

Biggest issue is Justice and the legal system integrity and adhering to the Constitution and law. I wonder when or if our lawyers will realize that they are the foremost security in preserving the nation.

---

Trump realizes it and has planned his attacks accordingly

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

KaiBear said:

---

Many folks choose to forget that the voluntary self deportations have been a huge , cost effective success.

With over 1 million illegals already gone via the program in less than a year.

---

That is a great point and an example of how to do it that no one can argue with in DC.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Mothra said:

---

sombear said:

---

I said and posted on here for months prior to the election that for the first time in my life I wasn't going to vote for the GOP candidate. I changed my mind last minute based on all the pro-Hamas BS by the Dems and crazy Green Deal BS from Kamala.

I regret my vote. The reason I was not going to vote for Trump was long term v. short term. No doubt, Trump was going to be better short term than Kamala - from a traditional conservate perspective. My concern was long term. And my concerns have proven justified.

I believe long term Trump has severely damaged: the GOP, conservatism, free markets, separation of powers, our Country's reputation, ally and international relations, global security, international freedom movements, among others. I also am angry that he single-handedly has forever precluded any argument that character or the most basic level of decency matters. Laughing about "mean tweets" has turned into rationalizing or even relishing bizarre and abhorrent behavior.

I say without reservation that conservatism and decency would have been better off long term with a disastrous Kamala presidency. It would have galvanized the best of our country against liberalism and cultural debauchery.

I was wrong.

---

You're one of the most thoughtful posters on this board, and I don't disagree much with your assessment of Trump.

Where I think you err is you greatly underestimate the amount of irreversible damage that would have been done to our country by another 4 years of the Biden admin. There's a strong likelihood that Harris would have attempted to pack the Supreme Court, ala FDR, to get her agenda passed. And of course a perpetuation of open borders, gender issues, identity politics, cracking down on free speech, political prosecutions, and foreign affair blunders would have undoubtedly been a total disaster, doing lasting damage to our country.

Republicans had crappy options, including Trump. But when it's crappy vs. evil, you better choose crappy.

---

Kamala would have had a GOP House and Senate, so short damage would have been mitigated.

She would not have touched the Court.

1A - Trump has been worse than Kamala would have been. (Threatening or even suing law firms, companies, media, judges; saying it should be treasonous to teach anything anti-American in schools; suing banks for de-banking him; firing or endorsing firing of gov employees over their views.)

Trump has been WORSE on foreign policy than I think Kamala would have been. Kamala would have supported Israel and would have been much stronger for Ukraine. She likely would not have bombed Iran (so I give that issue to Trump). She would not have invaded Venezuela or bombed boats (so I give her the edge there).

She definitely would not have mistreated and in some cases threatened our closest allies, issued tariffs, etc.

She would not have been so cozy with Russia or China.

Trump's political prosecutions (or threats) are just as bad, and he is more directly involved.

Credit Trump bigly on the border, but he's also gone too far.

I also credit Trump for speaking out against wokeness, etc., but there was already a major backlash in the making there.

---

Ridiculous case of a short memory

A. Harris would have continued Biden's horribly destructive immigration flood
B. Would have continued Biden's bizarre / destructive woke policies
C. Would have continued Biden's indifference to the fentanyl crises
D. Would have INCREASED Taxes. Where Trump has provided tax relief
E. The Middle East would still be in turmoil from Iran's nuclear bomb program
F. NATO would not have increased their defense spending
G Lawfare against Christians would have not only continued….but made worse.
H. Ridiculous green regulations would have continued to hamper economic growth.
I. Implicit discrimination against white people would have increased.
J. Military recruitment and morale would have continued to plummet.



Gone too far ?
How ?

You prefer to have these criminals remain on our streets ?

How many more have to be raped or murdered before you finally wake up ?

Or will it take the killing of a family member by a drunk driving illegal to finally insert a sense of reality into your insulated world ?

---

Good summary. In short, we (and for that matter of the world) would be presently suffering through the fourth term of Obama with the main over-arching goal being doing anything and everything to insure permanent leftist democrat dominance both now and (especially) in the future - the country, the American people, and the world be damned.

---

not correct. You obviously don't travel. The rest of the world doesn't need us and it is apparent. We ain
t what we used to be. Most people of note in the world want nothing to do with Merca, by god! We lost are way.

---

I have never voted for Trump. But you are wrong. I travel the world often and do business all over the middle east, europe, baltics, south america and asia. They love Trump. It is sickening how much they worship the guy. The world is full of libs and conservatives. You must work wtih libs. Just remembered, some of my canuck clients don't like Trump. Your statement is like saying Americans don't like Trump. Some do - some don't. We get it, you don't like Trump. But don't spread false info.

BearBall said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Mothra said:

---

sombear said:

---

I said and posted on here for months prior to the election that for the first time in my life I wasn't going to vote for the GOP candidate. I changed my mind last minute based on all the pro-Hamas BS by the Dems and crazy Green Deal BS from Kamala.

I regret my vote. The reason I was not going to vote for Trump was long term v. short term. No doubt, Trump was going to be better short term than Kamala - from a traditional conservate perspective. My concern was long term. And my concerns have proven justified.

I believe long term Trump has severely damaged: the GOP, conservatism, free markets, separation of powers, our Country's reputation, ally and international relations, global security, international freedom movements, among others. I also am angry that he single-handedly has forever precluded any argument that character or the most basic level of decency matters. Laughing about "mean tweets" has turned into rationalizing or even relishing bizarre and abhorrent behavior.

I say without reservation that conservatism and decency would have been better off long term with a disastrous Kamala presidency. It would have galvanized the best of our country against liberalism and cultural debauchery.

I was wrong.

---

You're one of the most thoughtful posters on this board, and I don't disagree much with your assessment of Trump.

Where I think you err is you greatly underestimate the amount of irreversible damage that would have been done to our country by another 4 years of the Biden admin. There's a strong likelihood that Harris would have attempted to pack the Supreme Court, ala FDR, to get her agenda passed. And of course a perpetuation of open borders, gender issues, identity politics, cracking down on free speech, political prosecutions, and foreign affair blunders would have undoubtedly been a total disaster, doing lasting damage to our country.

Republicans had crappy options, including Trump. But when it's crappy vs. evil, you better choose crappy.

---

Kamala would have had a GOP House and Senate, so short damage would have been mitigated.

She would not have touched the Court.

1A - Trump has been worse than Kamala would have been. (Threatening or even suing law firms, companies, media, judges; saying it should be treasonous to teach anything anti-American in schools; suing banks for de-banking him; firing or endorsing firing of gov employees over their views.)

Trump has been WORSE on foreign policy than I think Kamala would have been. Kamala would have supported Israel and would have been much stronger for Ukraine. She likely would not have bombed Iran (so I give that issue to Trump). She would not have invaded Venezuela or bombed boats (so I give her the edge there).

She definitely would not have mistreated and in some cases threatened our closest allies, issued tariffs, etc.

She would not have been so cozy with Russia or China.

Trump's political prosecutions (or threats) are just as bad, and he is more directly involved.

Credit Trump bigly on the border, but he's also gone too far.

I also credit Trump for speaking out against wokeness, etc., but there was already a major backlash in the making there.

---

Ridiculous case of a short memory

A. Harris would have continued Biden's horribly destructive immigration flood
B. Would have continued Biden's bizarre / destructive woke policies
C. Would have continued Biden's indifference to the fentanyl crises
D. Would have INCREASED Taxes. Where Trump has provided tax relief
E. The Middle East would still be in turmoil from Iran's nuclear bomb program
F. NATO would not have increased their defense spending
G Lawfare against Christians would have not only continued….but made worse.
H. Ridiculous green regulations would have continued to hamper economic growth.
I. Implicit discrimination against white people would have increased.
J. Military recruitment and morale would have continued to plummet.



Gone too far ?
How ?

You prefer to have these criminals remain on our streets ?

How many more have to be raped or murdered before you finally wake up ?

Or will it take the killing of a family member by a drunk driving illegal to finally insert a sense of reality into your insulated world ?

---

Good summary. In short, we (and for that matter of the world) would be presently suffering through the fourth term of Obama with the main over-arching goal being doing anything and everything to insure permanent leftist democrat dominance both now and (especially) in the future - the country, the American people, and the world be damned.

---

not correct. You obviously don't travel. The rest of the world doesn't need us and it is apparent. We ain
t what we used to be. Most people of note in the world want nothing to do with Merca, by god! We lost are way.

---

I have never voted for Trump. But you are wrong. I travel the world often and do business all over the middle east, europe, baltics, south america and asia. They love Trump. It is sickening how much they worship the guy. The world is full of libs and conservatives. You must work wtih libs. Just remembered, some of my canuck clients don't like Trump. Your statement is like saying Americans don't like Trump. Some do - some don't. We get it, you don't like Trump. But don't spread false info.

---

It is not shocking that Capt. Quick Stop only encounters lib co-workers at the CEFCO.

In the last year I have been in three other countries. I did not hear one negative comment about President Trump or the United States, but in every country I had at least one person come up to me professing love for both.

Regardless, I think this weird black-and-white, religious fundamentalism type thinking of the LWNJs is weird - I am old enough when they used to mock the "you're either with us or against us" of George W. Bush. Maybe conservatives are just not comfortable with the authoritarian, lock-step allegiance they love, but I do not really blanketly support or oppose President Trump or any president. Some of his policies I support, some I don't. I guess they're more into the Cult of Personality vs. policies.

BearBall said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Mothra said:

---

sombear said:

---

I said and posted on here for months prior to the election that for the first time in my life I wasn't going to vote for the GOP candidate. I changed my mind last minute based on all the pro-Hamas BS by the Dems and crazy Green Deal BS from Kamala.

I regret my vote. The reason I was not going to vote for Trump was long term v. short term. No doubt, Trump was going to be better short term than Kamala - from a traditional conservate perspective. My concern was long term. And my concerns have proven justified.

I believe long term Trump has severely damaged: the GOP, conservatism, free markets, separation of powers, our Country's reputation, ally and international relations, global security, international freedom movements, among others. I also am angry that he single-handedly has forever precluded any argument that character or the most basic level of decency matters. Laughing about "mean tweets" has turned into rationalizing or even relishing bizarre and abhorrent behavior.

I say without reservation that conservatism and decency would have been better off long term with a disastrous Kamala presidency. It would have galvanized the best of our country against liberalism and cultural debauchery.

I was wrong.

---

You're one of the most thoughtful posters on this board, and I don't disagree much with your assessment of Trump.

Where I think you err is you greatly underestimate the amount of irreversible damage that would have been done to our country by another 4 years of the Biden admin. There's a strong likelihood that Harris would have attempted to pack the Supreme Court, ala FDR, to get her agenda passed. And of course a perpetuation of open borders, gender issues, identity politics, cracking down on free speech, political prosecutions, and foreign affair blunders would have undoubtedly been a total disaster, doing lasting damage to our country.

Republicans had crappy options, including Trump. But when it's crappy vs. evil, you better choose crappy.

---

Kamala would have had a GOP House and Senate, so short damage would have been mitigated.

She would not have touched the Court.

1A - Trump has been worse than Kamala would have been. (Threatening or even suing law firms, companies, media, judges; saying it should be treasonous to teach anything anti-American in schools; suing banks for de-banking him; firing or endorsing firing of gov employees over their views.)

Trump has been WORSE on foreign policy than I think Kamala would have been. Kamala would have supported Israel and would have been much stronger for Ukraine. She likely would not have bombed Iran (so I give that issue to Trump). She would not have invaded Venezuela or bombed boats (so I give her the edge there).

She definitely would not have mistreated and in some cases threatened our closest allies, issued tariffs, etc.

She would not have been so cozy with Russia or China.

Trump's political prosecutions (or threats) are just as bad, and he is more directly involved.

Credit Trump bigly on the border, but he's also gone too far.

I also credit Trump for speaking out against wokeness, etc., but there was already a major backlash in the making there.

---

Ridiculous case of a short memory

A. Harris would have continued Biden's horribly destructive immigration flood
B. Would have continued Biden's bizarre / destructive woke policies
C. Would have continued Biden's indifference to the fentanyl crises
D. Would have INCREASED Taxes. Where Trump has provided tax relief
E. The Middle East would still be in turmoil from Iran's nuclear bomb program
F. NATO would not have increased their defense spending
G Lawfare against Christians would have not only continued….but made worse.
H. Ridiculous green regulations would have continued to hamper economic growth.
I. Implicit discrimination against white people would have increased.
J. Military recruitment and morale would have continued to plummet.



Gone too far ?
How ?

You prefer to have these criminals remain on our streets ?

How many more have to be raped or murdered before you finally wake up ?

Or will it take the killing of a family member by a drunk driving illegal to finally insert a sense of reality into your insulated world ?

---

Good summary. In short, we (and for that matter of the world) would be presently suffering through the fourth term of Obama with the main over-arching goal being doing anything and everything to insure permanent leftist democrat dominance both now and (especially) in the future - the country, the American people, and the world be damned.

---

not correct. You obviously don't travel. The rest of the world doesn't need us and it is apparent. We ain
t what we used to be. Most people of note in the world want nothing to do with Merca, by god! We lost are way.

---

II travel the world often and do business all over the middle east, europe, baltics, south america and asia. They love Trump. It is sickening how much they worship the guy.

---

Thankfully I don't go to central or South America anymore

Although I have a son in Medillin, Columbia and an old buddy in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Both tell me Trump is very popular in their respective countries . ( of course theirs is a small sample size )

Relatives throughout Canada. In Quebec most hate Trump. In western Canada ( with the exception of Vancouver ) most like Trump.

Honest question…….,

Why is it 'sickening' that most of the people you meet throughout the world 'adore' Trump ?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

FLBear5630 said:

---

Hungary? You do realize Hungary is Authoritarian? Italy? Also concerns of Authoritarianism..

---

From the State Department's Website about Hungary: "Political Prisoners and Detainees
There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees."

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

Border & Immigration
National Emergency Declaration: Issued on Day 1 to surge military resources to the southern border and resume wall construction.
Mass Deportation Operations: Launched the largest interior enforcement effort in U.S. history, prioritizing the removal of criminal aliens and gang members.
End of "Catch and Release": Fully reinstated the "Remain in Mexico" policy and terminated the CBP One app asylum process.
Birthright Citizenship EO: Signed an executive order to end automatic citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.
Economy & Energy
Universal Tariffs: Implemented a baseline tariff on foreign imports to protect American workers and incentivize domestic manufacturing.
"One Big Beautiful Bill" (H.R. 1): Signed major legislation making the 2017 tax cuts permanent and eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay.
Energy Emergency Declaration: Bypassed federal red tape to greenlight the Keystone XL pipeline and expand drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
Strategic Bitcoin Reserve: Established a national crypto reserve and ended the "Operation Choke Point 2.0" crackdown on digital assets.
Government Reform
Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE): Created a new agency, led by Elon Musk, which has already cut billions in wasteful federal contracts and "penny" production costs.
Schedule F Reinstatement: Reclassified thousands of civil service positions to "at-will," allowing for the removal of "Deep State" bureaucrats.
Department of Education Dismantling: Initiated the administrative process to shutter the agency and return educational control to the states.
Anti-Censorship EO: Signed a landmark order prohibiting federal agencies from colluding with Big Tech to censor American speech.
Foreign Policy
"Peace Through Strength" Summits: Brokered a swift end to the 12-Day War between Israel and Iran and established a framework to end the Ukraine-Russia conflict.
Maximum Pressure 2.0: Re-imposed crushing sanctions on Iran's oil networks and shadow banking systems.
Greenland Negotiations: Assertively launched a bid to acquire Greenland for strategic resource and defense purposes.
Venezuela Intervention: Conducted a military strike leading to the capture of Nicols Maduro to face charges in the United States.
Social & Cultural
Banning "Woke" Ideology: Issued orders to eliminate DEI programs in federal agencies and remove "gender ideology" from schools receiving federal funds.
Protecting Women's Sports: Signed the "Saving College Sports" order to ensure biological males do not compete in women's athletics.
Religious Freedom: Established the Religious Liberty Commission and enforced the Hyde Amendment to ensure no taxpayer funding for abortions.
Restoring History: Renamed military bases (e.g., Fort Bragg) back to their original names to honor American military heritage.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

---

'eff that. Minnesota needs to change tactics where they are refusing to turn over criminal illegal aliens with deportation orders and instead turning them loose on the streets, requiring ICE to spend substantially more money and effort to go find them.

Your ability to get an issue absolutely ass-backwards is unerring.

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

---

'eff that. Minnesota needs to change tactics where they are refusing to turn over criminal illegal aliens with deportation orders and instead turning them loose on the streets, requiring ICE to spend substantially more money and effort to go find them.

Your ability to get an issue absolutely ass-backwards is unerring.

---

I am surprised, someone that portrays themselves as so "wordly" seems confused and frustrated by DC politics. You know or should know it is not about what is right. It is about votes to stay in power to actually do your agenda. This is becoming a loser. Your ability to change a positive to a negative is just as unerring. The only ones who see success is you and your band, that will equal midterm crushing. You are losing the Independents, what happened in 2020 when that happened?

You should know as well as anyone there sre always two issues: what is right and what is politically expedient. Rarely do you get to do what is right.

The political cost of your way, even though it is right is getting too high. Now, dont get me wrong, Trump dont care.

Read the news this morning. This is not about immigration, that is the vehicle, this is about crushing MN and bringing them to heel. This is a Trump taking on the left, not immigration.

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.

Donald Trump is the first Republican with a national presence since Patrick Buchanan who has been willing to tackle the immigration problem head on.

If this isn't fixed the country is dead.

---

Actually I remember both G W Bush and other Presidents addressed immigration reform.

---

We actually do not need so-called immigration reform.

The primary difference is certain presidents simply ignored their Constitutional obligation to protect the nation by enforcing its borders.

---

Have you done the math?

If we have 15,000,000 illegals -

if they are arresting 400 a day. We are looking at about 75 years of this.
if they are arresting 800 a day. We are looking at about 37 years of this.
if they make the 3000 a day level to get Trump's bonuses. We are looking at about 8 years of this.

You think this is sustainable and a real method to solve the issue?

---

Practically, I do not think anyone believes every single illegal alien will be deported. That is why the focus is on criminal illegal aliens that committed crimes beyond breaking immigration laws.

---

Which is why I am saying they need to change tactics... They are fighting a losing battle. You have undertrained Agents in bad situations that are reacting poorly. They cannot take more people being shot. This leaderships fault for putting those guys in a bad situation that they are not prepared for.

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

---

'eff that. Minnesota needs to change tactics where they are refusing to turn over criminal illegal aliens with deportation orders and instead turning them loose on the streets, requiring ICE to spend substantially more money and effort to go find them.

Your ability to get an issue absolutely ass-backwards is unerring.

---

'Ignore' is a viable option on this free message board.

As it is impossible to have a rational exchange with some folks.

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

---

'eff that. Minnesota needs to change tactics where they are refusing to turn over criminal illegal aliens with deportation orders and instead turning them loose on the streets, requiring ICE to spend substantially more money and effort to go find them.

Your ability to get an issue absolutely ass-backwards is unerring.

---

I am surprised, someone that portrays themselves as so "wordly" seems confused and frustrated by DC politics. You know or should know it is not about what is right. It is about votes to stay in power to actually do your agenda.
We agree. Walz administration is desperate to not have its political machine upended by mass deportations.

This is becoming a loser. Your ability to change a positive to a negative is just as unerring.
The American people do not like conflict. They tend to blame GOP for it (thanks in no small part to media bias). So it's no surprise this has harmed his poll numbers. The only thing that would harm them more is to retreat. His base would be supremely disappointed. They matter, too, right? Just as much as the Democrat base, right?

The only ones who see success is you and your band, that will equal midterm crushing. You are losing the Independents, what happened in 2020 when that happened?
The mid-terms were lost the day he got elected. The only question is can we avoid what history teaches is inevitable. Riots in MN will not have any effect on the mid-terms, unless they are still ongoing. Ergo, win the damned thing and turn voter focus to the economy, which will be doing very, very well as the mid-terms approach.

You should know as well as anyone there sre always two issues: what is right and what is politically expedient. Rarely do you get to do what is right.
They call that the "middle ground fallacy." More often than not, one side is fully/mostly right and the other is fully/mostly wrong (like your posts about Trump.)

The political cost of your way, even though it is right is getting too high. Now, dont get me wrong, Trump dont care.

Read the news this morning. This is not about immigration, that is the vehicle, this is about crushing MN and bringing them to heel. This is a Trump taking on the left, not immigration.
the MN political machine needs to be crushed, for the benefit of taxpayers all over the country.

---

The cost of NOT getting the job done in MN is far higher than what we see now. For you, too. You do care about billions of dollars of fraudulent use of federal funds, don't you? No, you'd rather criticize Trump for not doing enough to stop spending, then savage him for actually attempting to stop spending.

30aBear said:

---

Border & Immigration
National Emergency Declaration: Issued on Day 1 to surge military resources to the southern border and resume wall construction.
Mass Deportation Operations: Launched the largest interior enforcement effort in U.S. history, prioritizing the removal of criminal aliens and gang members.
End of "Catch and Release": Fully reinstated the "Remain in Mexico" policy and terminated the CBP One app asylum process.
Birthright Citizenship EO: Signed an executive order to end automatic citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.
Economy & Energy
Universal Tariffs: Implemented a baseline tariff on foreign imports to protect American workers and incentivize domestic manufacturing.
"One Big Beautiful Bill" (H.R. 1): Signed major legislation making the 2017 tax cuts permanent and eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay.
Energy Emergency Declaration: Bypassed federal red tape to greenlight the Keystone XL pipeline and expand drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
Strategic Bitcoin Reserve: Established a national crypto reserve and ended the "Operation Choke Point 2.0" crackdown on digital assets.
Government Reform
Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE): Created a new agency, led by Elon Musk, which has already cut billions in wasteful federal contracts and "penny" production costs.
Schedule F Reinstatement: Reclassified thousands of civil service positions to "at-will," allowing for the removal of "Deep State" bureaucrats.
Department of Education Dismantling: Initiated the administrative process to shutter the agency and return educational control to the states.
Anti-Censorship EO: Signed a landmark order prohibiting federal agencies from colluding with Big Tech to censor American speech.
Foreign Policy
"Peace Through Strength" Summits: Brokered a swift end to the 12-Day War between Israel and Iran and established a framework to end the Ukraine-Russia conflict.
Maximum Pressure 2.0: Re-imposed crushing sanctions on Iran's oil networks and shadow banking systems.
Greenland Negotiations: Assertively launched a bid to acquire Greenland for strategic resource and defense purposes.
Venezuela Intervention: Conducted a military strike leading to the capture of Nicols Maduro to face charges in the United States.
Social & Cultural
Banning "Woke" Ideology: Issued orders to eliminate DEI programs in federal agencies and remove "gender ideology" from schools receiving federal funds.
Protecting Women's Sports: Signed the "Saving College Sports" order to ensure biological males do not compete in women's athletics.
Religious Freedom: Established the Religious Liberty Commission and enforced the Hyde Amendment to ensure no taxpayer funding for abortions.
Restoring History: Renamed military bases (e.g., Fort Bragg) back to their original names to honor American military heritage.

---

47 & Crew have done a great job -

- UF

D!

{ sipping coffee }

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

---

'eff that. Minnesota needs to change tactics where they are refusing to turn over criminal illegal aliens with deportation orders and instead turning them loose on the streets, requiring ICE to spend substantially more money and effort to go find them.

Your ability to get an issue absolutely ass-backwards is unerring.

---

I am surprised, someone that portrays themselves as so "wordly" seems confused and frustrated by DC politic...........
Read the news this morning. This is not about immigration, that is the vehicle, this is about crushing MN and bringing them to heel. This is a Trump taking on the left, not immigration.
the MN political machine needs to be crushed, for the benefit of taxpayers all over the country.

---

The cost of NOT getting the job done in MN is far higher than what we see now. For you, too. You do care about billions of dollars of fraudulent use of federal funds, don't you? No, you'd rather criticize Trump for not doing enough to stop spending, then savage him for actually attempting to stop spending.

---

The bigger issue in MN is the billions of dollars stolen by State sanctioned Fraud - make that the priority for now.....

- UF

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

That's fine. So what is your proposal?

Do you want to leave child molesters on the streets?

Do you want to further incentivize an insurrection against a lawful democracy?

---

Oh give it a break, no one is saying not to go after violent criminals, go full tactical. They will be applauded when they show the warrant to the public But that is the rub, you guys don't believe in transparency

How about just sending 2 agents to pick up the waitresses, kids, old people and plain workers? Not tactical units prowling the streets. It is an optic Trump is going to regret in the election. Need to back it down...

---

Who are you guys? What is our believe system? Do you have data or are you just being tribal?

So if you support removing child molesters and violent criminals, why have you spent so much energy opposing ICE?

Do you support so-called "sanctuary cities" or do you believe local officials should cooperate with federal law enforcement to remove violent criminals from the U.S.?

---

My view exactly, you can't see the difference.

Sanctuary cities? i am against them.

Process matters. How they do it matters.

---

Not really sure if that made sense to you, but not the easiest post to read ...

I have asked you multiple times - what process would you propose ICE follow?

What are the the issues unique to Minneapolis?

---

i have said numerous times. ICE needs to change tactics where they are shooting people, get a real PIO and use tactical for violent criminals not waitresses. ICE has to show they are making good faith effort to Congress.

---

'eff that. Minnesota needs to change tactics where they are refusing to turn over criminal illegal aliens with deportation orders and instead turning them loose on the streets, requiring ICE to spend substantially more money and effort to go find them.

Your ability to get an issue absolutely ass-backwards is unerring.

---

I am surprised, someone that portrays themselves as so "wordly" seems confused and frustrated by DC politics. You know or should know it is not about what is right. It is about votes to stay in power to actually do your agenda.
We agree. Walz administration is desperate to not have its political machine upended by mass deportations.

This is becoming a loser. Your ability to change a positive to a negative is just as unerring.
The American people do not like conflict. They tend to blame GOP for it (thanks in no small part to media bias). So it's no surprise this has harmed his poll numbers. The only thing that would harm them more is to retreat. His base would be supremely disappointed. They matter, too, right? Just as much as the Democrat base, right?

The only ones who see success is you and your band, that will equal midterm crushing. You are losing the Independents, what happened in 2020 when that happened?
The mid-terms were lost the day he got elected. The only question is can we avoid what history teaches is inevitable. Riots in MN will not have any effect on the mid-terms, unless they are still ongoing. Ergo, win the damned thing and turn voter focus to the economy, which will be doing very, very well as the mid-terms approach.

You should know as well as anyone there sre always two issues: what is right and what is politically expedient. Rarely do you get to do what is right.
They call that the "middle ground fallacy." More often than not, one side is fully/mostly right and the other is fully/mostly wrong (like your posts about Trump.)

The political cost of your way, even though it is right is getting too high. Now, dont get me wrong, Trump dont care.

Read the news this morning. This is not about immigration, that is the vehicle, this is about crushing MN and bringing them to heel. This is a Trump taking on the left, not immigration.
the MN political machine needs to be crushed, for the benefit of taxpayers all over the country.

---

The cost of NOT getting the job done in MN is far higher than what we see now. For you, too. You do care about billions of dollars of fraudulent use of federal funds, don't you? No, you'd rather criticize Trump for not doing enough to stop spending, then savage him for actually attempting to stop spending.

---

Let's quantify, what is the mission? That may help everyone.

Is it truly to run down and deport misdemeanor immigration abusers? If so, why the combat tactics?

Is it truly to get the felony, violent criminal illegals? If so, why are we getting distracted by the small fish? (By the way, MN is wrong in not turning over anyone in the jails. That does not serve the greater good.)

Is it to break the left? That makes the most sense based on how they are doing it. This is shock and awe, but I am not sure of the target.

This is not following a law enforcement/immigration process and ICE leadership is not working with the locals very well. Nothing gets done if the locals hate you and are working to deny you. Yet, nothing is being done to win over the locals, to the contrary this is more like an occupation.

Finally, I do not agree with your final paragraph. You see us and them. I see only us. They are Americans just like you and me, the Federal Government is in place to serve and protect the people. Not the other way around. You are looking to crush Americans, that is wrong. That is not a founding principle, actually the opposite we are supposed to be against oppressive Government and oppressive is not left or right. It can be both.