Trump offers pathway to citizenship in return for border security wishlist

[WritOfCertiorari]

If I was the deciding vote in the Senate, I would vote NO, even if it meant deporting the dreamers. It is not worth it for Democrats to save the dreamers, if it means cutting Legal Immigration in half, because the Democratic Party cannot survive without massive Non-White immigration, due to the fact we’ve been bleeding support from White people for 50 years. If you don’t believe me, then let me tell you if it wasn’t for the massive Non-White immigration since the 1980s, states like California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut would still be Red states, and Democrats would be losing in 49-state landslides every four years.

This might be the most immoral post I've ever seen on this forum. Go fornicate yourself dude.

[Beet]

I mean it’s a bad deal since it doesn’t confront any of the actual inefficiencies/problems with our immigration system, just restrictionist cause celebres.

It doesn’t end the backlogs. It doesn’t change the absurd green card allocation system. It doesn’t confront visa overstays, instead focusing on the dumb, worthless white elephant known as “the wall.”

This, too.

[BoAtlantis]

Make legal immigration a lot easier and accessible. But do a background check on them for health and criminal records.

Don't make the wait process like decades. And you'll have fewer people wanting to immigrate illegally.

[Sumner 1868]

I flipped through CNN and MSNBC earlier today. Zero discussion of this now that Dems have caved. It's all Mueller all the time. Every time Democrats sell out they move onto more Russia-Drumpf gossip. Vile.

[Bojack Horseman]

A wall is not negotiable. There will not be a wall, period. Even if it means deporting the dreamers. We’re going to have the House, the Senate, and the Presidency in 2021, so we’ll do DACA then.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

If I was the deciding vote in the Senate, I would vote NO, even if it meant deporting the dreamers. It is not worth it for Democrats to save the dreamers, if it means cutting Legal Immigration in half, because the Democratic Party cannot survive without massive Non-White immigration, due to the fact we’ve been bleeding support from White people for 50 years. If you don’t believe me, then let me tell you if it wasn’t for the massive Non-White immigration since the 1980s, states like California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut would still be Red states, and Democrats would be losing in 49-state landslides every four years.

White liberals have concluded that granting amnesty to the illegal invasion swarm will create conditions in which a white liberal can actually win a national election rather than lose all the time as they have been doing for the past 40 years. Except for the rapist guy anyway.

So, the solution is simple. Commence deportations. Once the invasion swarm is gone white liberals will no longer have to pretend to cry about the illegal invaders.

King Lear and his partner Limo Liberal (who wished for the collapse of the economy in the other thread) are not real leftists. They are most likely one of your kind actually.

[Blackacre]

A wall is not negotiable. There will not be a wall, period. Even if it means deporting the dreamers. We’re going to have the House, the Senate, and the Presidency in 2021, so we’ll do DACA then.

...why?

The wall is a money sink that does nothing. And if we wait until we have a trifecta again it'll be too late to save the dreamers.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

A wall is not negotiable. There will not be a wall, period. Even if it means deporting the dreamers. We’re going to have the House, the Senate, and the Presidency in 2021, so we’ll do DACA then.

There won't be any dreamers left in the country in 2021 under this scenario, so DACA would be completely useless.

[Mr. Reactionary]

A wall is not negotiable. There will not be a wall, period. Even if it means deporting the dreamers. We’re going to have the House, the Senate, and the Presidency in 2021, so we’ll do DACA then.

There won't be any dreamers left in the country in 2021 under this scenario, so DACA would be completely useless.

I mean, they are literally on a list.

[Don Vito Corleone]

If I was the deciding vote in the Senate, I would vote NO, even if it meant deporting the dreamers. It is not worth it for Democrats to save the dreamers, if it means cutting Legal Immigration in half, because the Democratic Party cannot survive without massive Non-White immigration, due to the fact we’ve been bleeding support from White people for 50 years. If you don’t believe me, then let me tell you if it wasn’t for the massive Non-White immigration since the 1980s, states like California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut would still be Red states, and Democrats would be losing in 49-state landslides every four years.

You see king lear, the problem is that if the non white population was substantialy lower, the Democrats would run completely different campaigns, and the party would be built to attract white people way more then it is currently, and you know  how I know this? Because in the 1990s, when the white population was much higher, guess what? The Democrats ran completely different campaigns and were built to attract white  people way more then they are now. And that's not even getting into the absurd notion that NY would be a red state without inmigration from the 80's and on LOL. At worst it would be Lean D, and in all likelihood it would be Likely D. (And whatever happened to you opposing MUH SJW IDENTITY POLITICS? Gee, it's almost like that was a cover to be a Republican hack)