Single Issue Voter: Controlling The Borders

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of my party affiliation/registration, I will vote based on one issue--strict control of our borders.

Other than right to life/abortion issue is anyone else approaching the next presidential election as a single issue voter ?

If other than right to life/abortion, what is that issue ?

Biden has dedicated more money to border control.
He has authorized more drones and other equipment as requested from DHS.
He has more drug recovery than Trump.
He has more human interdictions than Trump.
He has more deportations than Trump.
He has invested more in Central America to address the root issues of people wanting to emigrate.

So to answer your question, you should be voting Democrat.

Uh, no.

Democrats have all 3 branches of government for the past 2 years…this problem got out of control with Biden in charge. So if so lot understand how having open borders and having millions of people cross over will be better by having Democrats staying in control?

Also throwing more money at the problem like more, judges, agents, surveillance won’t fix the issue if another 2million people cross the border next year. How many 100’s of billions of dollars do yo you want to spend on this? How many more crowded schools do you need that can’t get the kids in? How many more hotels in NY will be filled with migrants? Why is there suddenly billions of dollars available for this when we did not have billions of dollars to help our homeless, veterans, minority communities???????

Are you forgetting the Caravans during the Trump years? How short our memory is.

And...the Dems have offered an immigration reform bill that covers a lot of issues, but guess who votes against it? The GOP. Why? Because they want to keep people like you angry, rather than, you know, dealing with the problem.

Also, you say "uh, no" but the facts matter, the current Administration has recovered more drugs, indicted more people, deported more illegal people, etc than the Trump Administration did. Maybe research it a little before commenting next time.

Unfortunately your statistics degree sucks.

Let’s go with the drug issue…

So let’s say Trump was able to capture 20 percent of the drugs crossing the border and Biden was able to capture the same percentage.
Then let’s say under Trump, the illegals crossing the border in year 2000 were 500k and year 2022 were 1 million people.
The. You are capturing more drugs BECAUSE yo I have double the people crossing the border illegally!

The increased investment in South and Central America is not helping as number of crossing are doubled.

There are more interaction because you have double the people crossing illegally.

So quoting that you are collecting more drugs, deporting more people, etc. is not a good thing… it means you have MORE people coming here illegally hence the Increased numbers.

Why are you assuming it's the same %?

Please stop using this offensive phrase.

Human beings are not "illegal." Human beings are not "illegals." (It makes me ill just to type that word.)

It's dehumanizing to characterize a person by one single action they have taken in their life. These people may have crossed the border illegally, but they are parents, and workers and homeowners and many other things as well.

The proper term is "undocumented immigrant." That describes people who have crossed the border without proper authorization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s what i see as problems:
-laws that allow to ask for a temporary immigrant status relatively easily (you need to circumvent the Mexican border guards and reach the US ones and ask them - they have to process you)
- lack of deportation enforcement (documents aren’t checked and status isn’t checked when applying for services)
- free services to anyone regardless of status

There need to be an unconditional legislative change (no tying it with legalizing the existing illegals) and a number of fairly undemocratic rules (no services to those here illegally, and no letting in those asking for protection)

Here you go again, using this dehumanizing term to describe people who are desperate to survive.

How would you like to be characterized this way?

You wouldn't.

Stop it.

[Anonymous]

Is there just one person posting on this thread over and over and over and over and over and over and over....

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s what i see as problems:
-laws that allow to ask for a temporary immigrant status relatively easily (you need to circumvent the Mexican border guards and reach the US ones and ask them - they have to process you)
- lack of deportation enforcement (documents aren’t checked and status isn’t checked when applying for services)
- free services to anyone regardless of status

There need to be an unconditional legislative change (no tying it with legalizing the existing illegals) and a number of fairly undemocratic rules (no services to those here illegally, and no letting in those asking for protection)

Here you go again, using this dehumanizing term to describe people who are desperate to survive.

How would you like to be characterized this way?

You wouldn't.

Stop it.

It’s just shorter to type
It does characterize them to a large degree though
I am not talking about bogus asylum seekers but about those who crossed illegally
They can’t get an SSN and sooner pr later their kids feel the burn when they can’t enroll in college or get a job

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s what i see as problems:
-laws that allow to ask for a temporary immigrant status relatively easily (you need to circumvent the Mexican border guards and reach the US ones and ask them - they have to process you)
- lack of deportation enforcement (documents aren’t checked and status isn’t checked when applying for services)
- free services to anyone regardless of status

There need to be an unconditional legislative change (no tying it with legalizing the existing illegals) and a number of fairly undemocratic rules (no services to those here illegally, and no letting in those asking for protection)

Here you go again, using this dehumanizing term to describe people who are desperate to survive.

How would you like to be characterized this way?

You wouldn't.

Stop it.

Under federal law, any non-U.S. citizen is an alien. Aliens who have entered the United States without permission, or who have violated the terms of their admission, are identified under the law as illegal aliens. That is a fact, not an issue for debate.

The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.
—United States Code, Title 8, §1101(a)(3)

An illegal alien…is any alien (1) whose most recent entry into the United States was without inspection, or (2) whose most recent admission to the United States was as a nonimmigrant and—(A) whose period of authorized stay as a nonimmigrant expired, or (B) whose unlawful status was known to the Government, before the date of the commission of the crime for which the alien is convicted.
—United States Code, Title 8, §1365(b)

It is also a fact that, according to U.S. law, it is a crime to enter the United States without permission. The first offense is a misdemeanor, the second, a felony. It is true, however, that most violations of immigration law are dealt with in a civil court and not in a criminal court. An immigration judge is really an administrative adjudicator who has authority under the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) to determine whether or not an individual is deportable under U.S. law. This procedure for handling immigration cases is designed to speed up the process of deportation; it should not be interpreted as an indication that illegal immigration is not a criminal violation. Because illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens, they are not entitled to the full panoply of rights and privileges under the Constitution as are citizens. Thus, they can be held subject to a non-judicial ruling instead of a jury trial for their criminal violation of immigration law.

Despite the clarity in the U.S. code on proper terminology, what is known in legal parlance as the “term of art,” a political movement has arisen whose object is to substitute euphemism for precision. A variety of motivations underlie this effort, but regardless of intent, the goal is the same. Insistence on alternate terms such as “undocumented worker” represent a deliberate avoidance of the central and inescapable fact that millions of people are illegally residing in the United States in direct violation of democratically enacted and popularly supported law. Those who object to the use of the term “illegal alien” appear to believe that if they can convince the American public that illegal immigration is not really illegal, then amnesty no longer is amnesty, and enforcing immigration law is unnecessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s what i see as problems:
-laws that allow to ask for a temporary immigrant status relatively easily (you need to circumvent the Mexican border guards and reach the US ones and ask them - they have to process you)
- lack of deportation enforcement (documents aren’t checked and status isn’t checked when applying for services)
- free services to anyone regardless of status

There need to be an unconditional legislative change (no tying it with legalizing the existing illegals) and a number of fairly undemocratic rules (no services to those here illegally, and no letting in those asking for protection)

Here you go again, using this dehumanizing term to describe people who are desperate to survive.

How would you like to be characterized this way?

You wouldn't.

Stop it.

Under federal law, any non-U.S. citizen is an alien. Aliens who have entered the United States without permission, or who have violated the terms of their admission, are identified under the law as illegal aliens. That is a fact, not an issue for debate.

The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.
—United States Code, Title 8, §1101(a)(3)

An illegal alien…is any alien (1) whose most recent entry into the United States was without inspection, or (2) whose most recent admission to the United States was as a nonimmigrant and—(A) whose period of authorized stay as a nonimmigrant expired, or (B) whose unlawful status was known to the Government, before the date of the commission of the crime for which the alien is convicted.
—United States Code, Title 8, §1365(b)

It is also a fact that, according to U.S. law, it is a crime to enter the United States without permission. The first offense is a misdemeanor, the second, a felony. It is true, however, that most violations of immigration law are dealt with in a civil court and not in a criminal court. An immigration judge is really an administrative adjudicator who has authority under the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) to determine whether or not an individual is deportable under U.S. law. This procedure for handling immigration cases is designed to speed up the process of deportation; it should not be interpreted as an indication that illegal immigration is not a criminal violation. Because illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens, they are not entitled to the full panoply of rights and privileges under the Constitution as are citizens. Thus, they can be held subject to a non-judicial ruling instead of a jury trial for their criminal violation of immigration law.

Despite the clarity in the U.S. code on proper terminology, what is known in legal parlance as the “term of art,” a political movement has arisen whose object is to substitute euphemism for precision. A variety of motivations underlie this effort, but regardless of intent, the goal is the same. Insistence on alternate terms such as “undocumented worker” represent a deliberate avoidance of the central and inescapable fact that millions of people are illegally residing in the United States in direct violation of democratically enacted and popularly supported law. Those who object to the use of the term “illegal alien” appear to believe that if they can convince the American public that illegal immigration is not really illegal, then amnesty no longer is amnesty, and enforcing immigration law is unnecessary.

+1000

[Anonymous]

NYT reports NYC Mayor Eric Adams has announced that due to the financial impact of ongoing migrant arrivals, the city will have to make budget cuts that will reduce NYPD officers to below 30,000 & slash the Education Department by $1 billion, amongst other cuts. He warns more cuts will be necessary unless the city receives more federal money to help with migrant arrivals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT reports NYC Mayor Eric Adams has announced that due to the financial impact of ongoing migrant arrivals, the city will have to make budget cuts that will reduce NYPD officers to below 30,000 & slash the Education Department by $1 billion, amongst other cuts. He warns more cuts will be necessary unless the city receives more federal money to help with migrant arrivals.

So, the NYC residents, aka US citizens, are forced to suffer because of the migrant crisis Biden has caused.
Does this seem fair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Even as top national security experts issue dire warnings of terror threats posed by our wide-open borders, congressional leaders are again failing to use the CR as an opportunity to force the Biden administration to end policies that place our nation in grave danger. While the Biden administration must take responsibility for the policies that resulted in 309,221 border encounters last month, Congress must be held accountable for their complicity. House Republicans have squandered a full year of their two-year control without passing a budget that forces the administration to end its reckless border and immigration policies. Halting the Biden Border Crisis was an explicit promise they made last year when they asked American voters to entrust them with the leadership of the House.

“H.R. 6363, the Further Continuing Appropriations and Other Extensions Act, extends the budget enacted by Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in 2022 into 2024. Rather than including changes needed to regain control of our borders by ending the mass release of illegal aliens, stopping asylum abuse, and limiting parole, this bill would reinforce the status quo.

“This failure is particularly egregious as the House has already passed H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act, which contains strong provisions to do exactly that. By the time the CR expires in February, nearly one million new illegal aliens will have been apprehended crossing our borders illegally, and countless more ‘gotaways’ will have found their way into the interior of the country – even as hostile nations and their proxy terror groups openly threaten the American people.

“The House leadership must insist that the language of H.R. 2 be included in any spending package moving forward, and the Biden administration and Senate Democrats must be forced to accept real border and immigration enforcement.”

but Democrats continue to give the US worker the middle finger.

Republican lawmakers are as much to blame for this ongoing problem as Democratic lawmakers. Solving problems is not the primary focus of lawmakers with an R or a D next to their names. It's been a common theme for a while now. This being said; we will continue to vote for them because we enjoy the pain and suffering they bring us.

Sorry. You are totally wrong about this.

We have NEVER seen the numbers we have seen in the past 3 years. Biden has set records for encounters, got-aways, migrant deaths, number of people on the terrorist list coming in, amount of fentanyl and other elicit drugs coming in, and every other metric. None of it is good.
He is not enforcing our laws, the vetting of those coming in is minimal, at best, and one can only assume that this is what he wants..... millions of low-skilled, poorly educated migrants coming to live in the US.
This is a humanitarian crisis. But, worse - it is a national security disaster waiting to happen.

+100
Anyone parroting the the left-wing talking points, like the PP, needs their head examined. Such stupidity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of my party affiliation/registration, I will vote based on one issue--strict control of our borders.

Other than right to life/abortion issue is anyone else approaching the next presidential election as a single issue voter ?

If other than right to life/abortion, what is that issue ?

Biden has dedicated more money to border control.
He has authorized more drones and other equipment as requested from DHS.
He has more drug recovery than Trump.
He has more human interdictions than Trump.
He has more deportations than Trump.
He has invested more in Central America to address the root issues of people wanting to emigrate.

So to answer your question, you should be voting Democrat.

Uh, no.

Democrats have all 3 branches of government for the past 2 years…this problem got out of control with Biden in charge. So if so lot understand how having open borders and having millions of people cross over will be better by having Democrats staying in control?

Also throwing more money at the problem like more, judges, agents, surveillance won’t fix the issue if another 2million people cross the border next year. How many 100’s of billions of dollars do yo you want to spend on this? How many more crowded schools do you need that can’t get the kids in? How many more hotels in NY will be filled with migrants? Why is there suddenly billions of dollars available for this when we did not have billions of dollars to help our homeless, veterans, minority communities???????

Are you forgetting the Caravans during the Trump years? How short our memory is.

And...the Dems have offered an immigration reform bill that covers a lot of issues, but guess who votes against it? The GOP. Why? Because they want to keep people like you angry, rather than, you know, dealing with the problem.

Also, you say "uh, no" but the facts matter, the current Administration has recovered more drugs, indicted more people, deported more illegal people, etc than the Trump Administration did. Maybe research it a little before commenting next time.

Unfortunately your statistics degree sucks.

Let’s go with the drug issue…

So let’s say Trump was able to capture 20 percent of the drugs crossing the border and Biden was able to capture the same percentage.
Then let’s say under Trump, the illegals crossing the border in year 2000 were 500k and year 2022 were 1 million people.
The. You are capturing more drugs BECAUSE yo I have double the people crossing the border illegally!

The increased investment in South and Central America is not helping as number of crossing are doubled.

There are more interaction because you have double the people crossing illegally.

So quoting that you are collecting more drugs, deporting more people, etc. is not a good thing… it means you have MORE people coming here illegally hence the Increased numbers.

Why are you assuming it's the same %?

Please stop using this offensive phrase.

Human beings are not "illegal." Human beings are not "illegals." (It makes me ill just to type that word.)

It's dehumanizing to characterize a person by one single action they have taken in their life. These people may have crossed the border illegally, but they are parents, and workers and homeowners and many other things as well.

The proper term is "undocumented immigrant." That describes people who have crossed the border without proper authorization.

DP. Interesting. So, when these "undocumented immigrants" cross the border illegally - over and over again - is it ok to then refer to them as illegals? Rhetorical question, btw. I have absolutely zero patience with people like you who can't even see the forest for the trees.

What is dehumanizing, is this insistence from the left that the US is somehow obligated to take in millions of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. We are not. And that is the "proper term."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s what i see as problems:
-laws that allow to ask for a temporary immigrant status relatively easily (you need to circumvent the Mexican border guards and reach the US ones and ask them - they have to process you)
- lack of deportation enforcement (documents aren’t checked and status isn’t checked when applying for services)
- free services to anyone regardless of status

There need to be an unconditional legislative change (no tying it with legalizing the existing illegals) and a number of fairly undemocratic rules (no services to those here illegally, and no letting in those asking for protection)

Here you go again, using this dehumanizing term to describe people who are desperate to survive.

How would you like to be characterized this way?

You wouldn't.

Stop it.

DP. Perhaps it is you who shouldn't click on threads that trigger you so. People who cross the border illegally can be correctly referred to as "illegals" or "illegal immigrants."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT reports NYC Mayor Eric Adams has announced that due to the financial impact of ongoing migrant arrivals, the city will have to make budget cuts that will reduce NYPD officers to below 30,000 & slash the Education Department by $1 billion, amongst other cuts. He warns more cuts will be necessary unless the city receives more federal money to help with migrant arrivals.

Wow. I would be more than a little pissed if I lived in NYC. But then again, I guess they're getting what they voted for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYT reports NYC Mayor Eric Adams has announced that due to the financial impact of ongoing migrant arrivals, the city will have to make budget cuts that will reduce NYPD officers to below 30,000 & slash the Education Department by $1 billion, amongst other cuts. He warns more cuts will be necessary unless the city receives more federal money to help with migrant arrivals.

So, the NYC residents, aka US citizens, are forced to suffer because of the migrant crisis Biden has caused.
Does this seem fair?

DP. No it does not. And I will be even more incensed if they DO receive more federal money to pay for people who should not be in the US in the first place. *Taxpayer* money. Unbelievable.

[Anonymous]

Those of you who think Trump solved the immigration problem: He knew he wouldn't be in office forever. So what constitutes true success - a solution that is only effective while he is still in office, or a legislative accomplishment that outlasts him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who think Trump solved the immigration problem: He knew he wouldn't be in office forever. So what constitutes true success - a solution that is only effective while he is still in office, or a legislative accomplishment that outlasts him?

No one thinks he "solved" the immigration problem. But it is undeniable that illegal immigration under Biden has reached unprecedented highs. Biden reversed and/or ended all of Trump's border initiatives on his first day in office. Surely you can see the connection?