ChiGoose
-
Posts
4,569 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ChiGoose
-
-
2 hours ago, Orlando Buffalo said:
Congressional action is also temporary because the next group in 2 years can change it just as quickly. Chi, if you admit our border situation was a cluster from 2021-2024 you need to ask yourself why. The fact that you recognize immigration is a complex topic is not an excuse for the crap show that existed the past few years, especially when you point out Congress did nothing this year but the situation is already 75% better.
I'm not sure what you think temporary means, but the factors listed for the decrease in crossings are all things that could change in a moment. In fact, Trump seems intent on undermining probably the most important factor: greater cooperation and partnership from Mexico.
Again, I don't think you can claim you've solved an issue if your solution can be done away with easily and by people other than yourself. You seem hung up on the fact that temporary things can work temporarily but I don't think you can call that "solving" anything.
MAGA thinks everything is simple and can be solved simply. Usually with loud noises and big talk. But their policies fall apart when applied to the real world because not everything is as simple as a Truth Social post.
-
34 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said:
Your mocking me when you keep contradicting yourself is fun. We both agree the problem improved dramatically since June, we both agree that Congress had nothing to do with it, we both agree that Biden rescinded all of Trump's rules, but you seem to have an issue rectifying two points: how did Biden fix so much of the problem without Congress since he can't do anything without Congress? And now you add in the brain dead concept that any law in the US can not be overturned tomorrow, except for what is in the Constitution.
Reading this thread is showing me the concept that when a person is lied to repeatedly and often they react one of two ways: either get mad at those who lied to them( media and politicians) or double down on the lie so they don't have to admit being wrong. Usually the second version is more common in people who were willing dupes.
It’s really not as hard as you’re making it seem.
Executive orders are insufficient for solving any longstanding problem because they lack the finality of an enacted law. They are a stopgap at best.
If you actually care about solving a problem like the border crisis, you would do so with a law, not an executive order. Any action taken by executive order would almost certainly be insufficient and temporary.
Reading your responses is showing me that you are an unserious hack who just guzzles whatever nonsense makes them feel good because solving hard problems is too difficult for you.
The only actual solution to the border crisis is congressional action. Everything else is either mitigation or a distraction. But you seem willing to follow the shiny object because it’s easier than actually thinking for yourself.
-
36 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said:
As you state the president can rescind prior presidents executive orders, I at no point insinuated he could not do that. You literally in back to back comments wrote
"Analysts credit the Biden administration’s use of legal pathways, a June 2024 executive order on asylum policy and greater cooperation with Mexico for the significant decline at the border. Illegal entry is lower today than when Donald Trump left office, a fact neither side mentions on the campaign trail.”
Then immediately wrote
"It’s almost as if the only way to solve the border issue is through congressional action"
My reading comprehension is fine, so let me ask which previous statement is incorrect, did Biden use executive orders to improve the border or does he need Congress to do anything?
You said “you posted Biden fixed 75% problem in June of 2024 without Congress by executive order” when I said no such thing, as I had quoted an article saying there were multiple factors diving down illegal immigration.
You’re continuing to ignore the non-executive action factors driving the change and then appearing confused when called out on it.
Additionally, any action that can be immediately rescinded can hardly be called as solving a problem. Unless your definition of solving a problem is kicking the can down the road.
Consider sitting down for a bit before you continue to embarrass yourself.
32 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:The people Trump appointed for the border are 100 times more serious than the Biden administration about stopping illegal immigration…
And I will bet anything that we will see better results…I’ll go even further and predict that the Trump administration will make that fake border bill look like a joke…These people are not F-ing around, and I will embrace every moment of it…👍
Good luck with that. If Trump has his way, you’re going to see massive inflation on produce and other goods.
But it’ll be worth it for you, right?
-
52 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said:
On Bidens first day on office he rescinded Trump's policy which is why the problems at the border escalated. But your last post is all the proof I need to show you are a liar or mentally stunted, you posted Biden fixed 75% problem in June of 2024 without Congress by executive order.
Since you seem to have reading comprehension issues, I’ll point out that the article cited multiple factors, not just the executive order.
And in case you also didn’t do well in civics class, you should know that executive orders can be rescinded by any president. They do not have lasting value like a law would.
Before you call me a liar, maybe wonder if you’re actually an idiot.
1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:You either want to stop illegal immigration or you don’t…
People supporting a bill that allows a million illegals clearly aren’t looking to stop it, and is a non starter…
Why not eliminate all illegal immigration, and if 1000 get through, so be it…At least it’s not PURPOSELY allowing 1 MILLION illegals in…
Pretty common sense, wouldn’t you say? 👍
You either want to stop illegal immigration or you want to stop anything that could curb it unless you get a big stupid wall across the desert that won’t do anything.
The problem isn’t that I want illegal immigration, it’s that the GOP proposals to solve it neither solve it nor address the root causes. They’re just grandstanding non-starters designed to keep the issue alive for elections because it’s a good issue for them.
What do you think decriminalize means, by the way?
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:
That bill actually decriminalized illegal immigration for up to a million migrants per year…
That bill was a fraud, and solved nothing, even though Dems and Establishment Republicans want to pretend like it did…
You would fit in very well with the progressives and DemSocs with your “everything or nothing” approach to lawmaking.-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said:
Ok, so Biden completely reversed his previous stance on June of this year, why would that be? You dopes keep pretending that the situation is not the opposite of what was done from mid 2021 till early 2024.
It’s almost as if the only way to solve the border issue is through congressional action and that Biden pursued that path (even allowing one of the most conservative senators to write the bill in exchange for propping up our allies) until it became clear that the GOP had no intention on actually solving the crisis when it’s a good election issue for them.
But you dopes keep thinking that the president is a king who can solve everything with the wave of a pen.
-
3
-
-
9 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said:
So why did the number of immigrants drop by 75% in the past 8 months in your opinion?
Undocumented Immigration Has Plummeted By 98% From 4 Key Countries“Analysts credit the Biden administration’s use of legal pathways, a June 2024 executive order on asylum policy and greater cooperation with Mexico for the significant decline at the border. Illegal entry is lower today than when Donald Trump left office, a fact neither side mentions on the campaign trail.”
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said:
Well you Marxist Left would be experts at not having an original thought.
The irony here is absolutely incredible.
We are finding new levels of lack of self-awareness never before thought to be possible.
-
Tommy Eyerolls sticks to his script. The idea of having an original thought causes him too much pain, so better for him to just spew the talking points he’s been handed.
-
GREAT NEWS! I just had a wonderful conversation with the coach of the Buffalo Bills, Sean McDermott. He has agreed to start Josh Allen at Quarterback. We also talked about what can be done to stop the massive Chiefs inflow into the Super Bowl, and also, Bills fans having to watch these Chiefs Super Bowls. It was a very productive conversation!
-
2
-
-
Let’s take politics out of this and just look at it logically.
Negotiator 1: You need to do X, or I’m going to do Y.
Negotiator 2: I’ve been doing X for a year. If you do Y, I’m going to do Y back to you.
Negotiator 1: Good news, everyone! I have convinced Negotiator 2 to do X!
Would anyone here honestly think Negotiator 1 did a good job?
-
1
-
-
ITT: Incredibly gullible people
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
The party moved to action by Oprah, Beyonce, TSwift and the like says "Hey girl hey!". *
*I'm just the intermediary here, just passing along messages because Team Harris is a few mill in the hole and Orpah et al like to get paid to provide you with direction.
Let me know when a Dem president nominates Oprah to the cabinet because they like her on tv-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, B-Man said:
"Apparent" to those whose psyche depends on lying to themselves to maintain their limited worldview.
To the rest of America their credentials are obvious.
.
Cool story you tell yourself, buddy. You’re doing that projection thing again. -
It seems fairly apparent at this point that an important factor on whether or not Trump will nominate someone is if he sees them on the TV and they butter him up enough, regardless of their experience or qualifications.
-
16 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:
The left is quoting and supporting Claudia? The Marxist installed by cartels? How many regional politicians (opposition party) and reporters were killed in her election?
You can't make it up.
MAGA: Claudia said this thing and it totally supports our policy!Reality: Claudia did not say that. Here’s what she actually said.
MAGA: Oh, now liberals are quoting Claudia approvingly? Marxists!
You can’t make it up.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:
Because of the miles of red tape required to drill for our own?
Because our refineries weren’t built to process the shale oil we get here and are better suited to crude we can import.
So we make something that is more useful to others so we sell it to them and buy things that are more useful to us. Makes sense to me.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, JFKjr said:
The U.S. was energy independent under Trump. Not so under Biden. We don't have to worry about tariffs on oil if we're producing it ourselves.
Some fun facts about American energy independence:
- We import energy that better fits our needs and export what we produce here that isn't as good for our systems: "U.S. refineries are well-suited to process heavy, sour crude oils. But the oil produced from the shale oil boom is primarily lighter and sweeter. Thus, U.S. oil producers can export this oil, while refiners can import the heavy, sour crude that they prefer."
- We also import energy to process for sale: "The second reason is that we may simply import crude oil to process it and export the finished products. In that scenario, we aren’t importing oil because we need it, but rather because it is financially lucrative to do so."
- "During President Trump’s term, the U.S. imported an average of 9.3 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil and finished products per day."
-
"But the shale boom unleashed huge amounts of domestic oil and gas, and by 2012 U.S. net imports had fallen to half the 2005 level.
By the time President Trump took office in 2017, U.S. net energy imports had fallen 75% from the 2005 level."
-
"In 2022, U.S. net energy exports grew to 5.94 quads, which is the highest number on record. Total U.S. energy production was also the highest on record. Overall, the U.S. produced 2.5% more energy in 2022 than we consumed. By comparison, in 2005 the U.S. consumed 44% more energy than we produced."
-
"In conclusion, 2022 marked the highest level of US energy independence since before 1950."
TIL: Apparently Trump was president in 2022?
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
19 hours ago, K D said:
It's probably a good idea to be skeptical of posts about an article that don't include a link to the article, especially if the post is from a questionable source like Charlie Kirk. Here is the actual story: Migrant Caravans Not Reaching Border, Claudia Sheinbaum Says After Trump Threats
What Sheinbaum actually said is that Mexico was already taking the actions Trump demanded *before* he proposed these tariffs. She did not say that they would change how they approach the border in light of the tariffs but did threaten retaliatory tariffs (which is an obvious reaction the US should expect from any country upon which we place broad-based tariffs).
"Maybe President Trump doesn't know this, but of those arriving at the border—which is significantly fewer, 75 percent less than in December 2023—half them have a CBP One appointment. In other words, they have an appointment. So, they [the U.S.] are the ones inviting them to come to the United States," she said.
Sheinbaum also highlighted Mexico's proactive role in addressing migration while criticizing the U.S. for failing to tackle the root causes. "If a percentage of what the United States spends on war were dedicated to peace and development, it would address the underlying causes of migration," she said, advocating for regional investment over punitive measures."
Also, it's a bit strange that Trump originally proposed the tariffs as an economic measure to allow for tax cuts (it's clear that he incorrectly believes that the foreign countries pay the tariffs when the burden is actually placed on US consumers) but now he's saying it's to curb certain behaviors. However, his inconsistency has never been a problem for his supporters before...
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:
So why? A beef with Canada because Trump dislikes Trudeau, who is younger, better looking, with better hair, and the worst sin of all, taller?
Trump must have some issue with the USMCA trade agreement since he's vowing to break it on day one. I guess he thinks it was negotiated by an idiot and/or loser?
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Roundybout said:
Smart ones realize that globalism IS America first but that wouldn’t work with their dreams of living in a Norman Rockwell painting.
After WWII, we rebuilt the global system in our favor. After the collapse of the USSR, we positioned ourselves on top of the global order.
Now, we have decided to cede that power and responsibility, leaving a void to be filled by whoever wants it.
-
1
-
-
Obvious responses were obvious:
Trump’s Tariffs Will ‘Probably’ Cause Walmart Price Hikes, CFO Says
Companies Have a Playbook for Tariffs Under Trump. It Includes Price Increases.
Trump's win could lead companies to push up prices. Here's why.
Mexico Suggests It Would Impose Its Own Tariffs to Retaliate Against Any Trump Tariffs
If you're planning on any major purchases like appliances, best to pull the trigger on that now before prices start jumping up.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Chi, you all were fighting to get in line to vote for a guy who disintegrated during a nationally televised debate, stalwart in your belief that a guy clearly in rapid decline was the one true one. That was reality, and it was only one of several absurd positions adopted by your party and why things went the way they did.
In the spirit of healing, though, I offer:
Dear Mister Fantasy, play us a tune
Something to make us all happy
Do anything, take us out of this gloom
Sing a song, play guitar, make it snappy
You are the one who can make us all laugh
But doing that, you break out in tears
Please don't be sad if it was a straight mind you had
We wouldn't have known you all these yearsElections are binary choices. I didn't want Biden to run for re-election, but I don't get to make that decision. Instead, I had to choose between a buffoon with a long history of crimes and failed businesses; who surrounded himself with criminals, incompetent toadies, and lickspittles; who loves dictators and dislikes our allies; and whose economic plan seems to be designed to raise prices across the board for Americans while sending our economy into the tank, or vote for someone who was not that.
Easiest decision in the world.
1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:I conclude that Smith never really had any intention of bringing Trump to trial on any document handling charges. It was all about creating "optics" for the 2024 Presidential race. If Trump wasn't running for office this would have played out quietly. It was all about politics. The idea was to discredit the former President in the eyes of potential 2024 voters. The made-for-TV drama that was the FBI raid would not have been necessary. Leaking stories and information to create the perception of guilt along the way. Now that he won the election and there are no political points to score its all moot. Smith smartly chose to close out the case. Personally and professionally there's just no upside at this point.
If anyone still wants to continue believing it was about the rule of law and the interests of national security pursuant to the handling of confidential and secret information then have at it. That's moot too. Lots of other political figures have gotten away with improper handling of secret and confidential documents, including former Senator Biden, and a consequence of Smith's investigation may be tougher scrutiny and treatment of others in the future. Be careful what you wish for might apply here.
This is pure nonsense.
-
51 minutes ago, B-Man said:
That simply isn't true.
But the fact that you interpret the lawfare use this way certainly is not a surprise to anyone here.
Any one of us who had done what Trump had done would already be in jail.
But please, continue with your fantasies. Fantasies won over reality, so you might as well.
-
1
-
Mexico to stop flow of illegals after discussion with President Trump.
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Holy straw-man projection, Batman!
I greatly appreciate you reinforcing my point that MAGA falsely believes that Dems want open borders simply because they reject ineffective and dumb MAGA border policies.