2022 Mid-Terms - All Races, Polls, and Russian Interference

[Buffarukus]

14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Well, he’s right.

 

Unless you think allowing criminals to do whatever they want to undocumented immigrants with no repercussions is a good thing.  

 

maybe have legal immigration that documents people? 🤔

 

if that is a issue..hear me out. you fight to fix the policies to make it cheaper/easier to become a citizen? instead of "welcoming" people who  brake the law and saying thier are issues that arise for not doing so.

 

leftists love to look straight past options that involve actually doing the right thing as if there simply no personal choices in this world.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Buffarukus

[BillStime]

2 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

This from the clown that started a thread on "distractions."

 

B-Man raises legitimate concern about a clueless clown in PA......you immediately deflect to Dr. Oz.  

 

Instead of commenting on the clueless clown.  

Jack is a known white supremacist and hangs with white supremacists.

 

I could give to flying phucks what Jack has to say while the guy from New Jersey slips in the polls.

 

Keep crying about covid 

[ChiGoose]

31 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

maybe have legal immigration that documents people? 🤔

 

if that is a issue..hear me out. you fight to fix the policies to make it cheaper/easier to become a citizen? instead of "welcoming" people who  brake the law and saying thier are issues that arise for not doing so.

 

leftists love to look straight past options that involve actually doing the right thing as if there simply no personal choices in this world.

Immigration policy is set at the national level. Cities don’t really have much influence in granting citizenship. 
 

Immigration policy is also hopelessly broken because there is no real reason to fix it.

 

Therefore, if you are the mayor of a city, you may have a large undocumented population but you have no policy levers in which to fix it.

 

So your options are to either allow undocumented immigrants to report crimes or be witnesses in cases against criminals, or you can make them too scared to help with crime because they are worried you will deport them.

 

If your goal is to actually solve crimes, this is an exceedingly easy decision to make. 

[Buffarukus]

52 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Immigration policy is set at the national level. Cities don’t really have much influence in granting citizenship. 
 

Immigration policy is also hopelessly broken because there is no real reason to fix it.

 

Therefore, if you are the mayor of a city, you may have a large undocumented population but you have no policy levers in which to fix it.

 

So your options are to either allow undocumented immigrants to report crimes or be witnesses in cases against criminals, or you can make them too scared to help with crime because they are worried you will deport them.

 

If your goal is to actually solve crimes, this is an exceedingly easy decision to make. 

 

so why is there no pressure to fix it at the national level? seems as though this administration has clear intentions of not enforcing the law yet none to reform it either causing more of said problems you are implying.

 

so YOU have 2 choices. invite illegal aliens to your state knowing full well they are breaking the law to begin with and tell them you will provide cover, thus promoting more illegals into crossing for this arangment and then talking about problems..scared to talk to police. or tell illegals you will not provide cover for a illegal act and instead fight for congress to make necessary changes where "undocumented" is not a major issue by giving citizenship or making legal crossings more attainable. thus they can move/ live free in our society without relying on states to declare they are accomplices to a boarder crisis/illegal citizenship as if its no big deal.

 

declaring you are breaking federal law is becoming pretty common. states just giving the finger as they see fit and we wonder why civil war is on the table. 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by Buffarukus

[Dr.Sack]

24 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

so why is there no pressure to fix it at the national level? seems as though this administration has clear intentions of not enforcing the law yet none to reform it either causing more of said problems you are implying.

 

so YOU have 2 choices. invite illegal aliens to your state knowing full well they are breaking the law to begin with and tell them you will provide cover, thus promoting more illegals into crossing for this arangment and then talking about problems..scared to talk to police. or tell illegals you will not provide cover for a illegal act and instead fight for congress to make necessary changes where "undocumented" is not a major issue by giving citizenship or making legal crossings more attainable. thus they can move/ live free in our society without relying on states to declare they are accomplices to a boarder crisis/illegal citizenship as if its no big deal.

 

declaring you are breaking federal law is becoming pretty common. states just giving the finger as they see fit and we wonder why civil war is on the table. 

 

 

I love the duopoly. Biden deporting at numbers higher than Trump. We need to get madder so as to create faux inflection point that there is any real variance. 

[Buffarukus]

35 minutes ago, Dr.Sack said:

I love the duopoly. Biden deporting at numbers higher than Trump. We need to get madder so as to create faux inflection point that there is any real variance. 

 

is that a response to my statement? is there not the biggest influx of illegals coming into this country under this administration? pretty easy to deport really high numbers when there are so many to deport and historic numbers not deported, but ill choose which statistic i like and go with that. is that the variance? anyways, anything on federal law and why its not just being ignored but ENCOURAGED to be ignored and how that effects the situation we were speaking of. think its making it better or worse overall. id say worse and thus more deportations for your comparison. maybe you think trump was soft on immigration? duopoly, interesting word. do something illegal we will not care yet we will talk about the negative effects these people face after we encouraged the illegal activity to happen. is that a good definition of the word. seems like it.

 

may need a thesaurus to continue. 

 

every media station has said the southern boarder is a mess and even ny and dc mayors are talking about the hardships they are now faced with dealing with the influx.so its not bias speaking, with me anyhow.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by Buffarukus

[Dr.Sack]

26 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

is that a response to my statement? is there not the biggest influx of illegals coming into this country under this administration? pretty easy to deport really high numbers when there are so many to deport and historic numbers not deported, but ill choose which statistic i like and go with that. is that the variance? anyways, anything on federal law and why its not just being ignored but ENCOURAGED to be ignored and how that effects the situation we were speaking of. think its making it better or worse overall. id say worse and thus more deportations for your comparison. maybe you think trump was soft on immigration? duopoly, interesting word. do something illegal we will not care yet we will talk about the negative effects these people face after we encouraged the illegal activity to happen. is that a good definition of the word. seems like it.

 

may need a thesaurus to continue. 

 

every media station has said the southern boarder is a mess and even ny and dc mayors are talking about the hardships they are now faced with dealing with the influx.so its not bias speaking, with me anyhow.

 

 

 

 

Let’s focus on detentions, “kids in cages”, and deportations. Biden exceeding Trump levels on all 3 metrics. Biden greater evil as he does it in a sneaky grandfatherly way. 

[Doc Brown]

50 minutes ago, Dr.Sack said:

I love the duopoly. Biden deporting at numbers higher than Trump. We need to get madder so as to create faux inflection point that there is any real variance. 

Yeah.  Duopoly applies here.  Both parties have a vested interest in exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain and are indifferent to rolling back or ramping up the deportation of undocumented immigrants.

[Buffarukus]

27 minutes ago, Dr.Sack said:

Let’s focus on detentions, “kids in cages”, and deportations. Biden exceeding Trump levels on all 3 metrics. Biden greater evil as he does it in a sneaky grandfatherly way. 

 

 i gave several different points of info to say regardless how grandfatherly he does things. the influx is extremely high. i gave examples of 2 democratic mayors who provide "sancuary" saying it is a problem for the state. dc saying rep are "tricking" them to going there. ny adams saying he needs fed help as the system cant handle the economics of all the new people. goose is saying another issue exists. the fact their status makes them unable to speak with authorities in reference to crime. we can go on and on about problems that are created and im suggesting the root is american leaders not outright opposing people come in illegally but instead many are encouraging it. the fix is not to continue down this path. its to either A uphold the law or B change the law. instead dems want a C ignore it and complain about the multitude of issues that result. thats the conversation. now im in some side issue where you seem to ve suggesting the problem does not exist due to deportation numbers against ALL information that is available. im not ready to even debate something so clear based on another consequence. more illegals equals more deportations...hell trumps remain in mexico policy alone would make less deportations necessary yet your holding this one statistic as some truth to derail what i am saying in the first place.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Buffarukus

[B-Man]

 

 

Election Victories by Trump Allies Showcase His Grip on the G.O.P. Base (msn.com)

 

PHOENIX — Primary victories in Arizona and Michigan for allies of Donald J. Trump on Tuesday reaffirmed his continued influence over the Republican Party, as the former president has sought to cleanse the party of his critics, install loyalists in key swing-state offices and scare off potential 2024 rivals with a show of brute political force.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/election-victories-by-trump-allies-showcase-his-grip-on-the-g-o-p-base/ar-AA10g22x?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=087c3a893bee44b58adefa547e36908a

 

 

 

[ChiGoose]

8 hours ago, Buffarukus said:

 

so why is there no pressure to fix it at the national level? seems as though this administration has clear intentions of not enforcing the law yet none to reform it either causing more of said problems you are implying.

 

so YOU have 2 choices. invite illegal aliens to your state knowing full well they are breaking the law to begin with and tell them you will provide cover, thus promoting more illegals into crossing for this arangment and then talking about problems..scared to talk to police. or tell illegals you will not provide cover for a illegal act and instead fight for congress to make necessary changes where "undocumented" is not a major issue by giving citizenship or making legal crossings more attainable. thus they can move/ live free in our society without relying on states to declare they are accomplices to a boarder crisis/illegal citizenship as if its no big deal.

 

declaring you are breaking federal law is becoming pretty common. states just giving the finger as they see fit and we wonder why civil war is on the table. 

 

 

 

If you are a mayor of a large city, there are likely already many undocumented people in the city to begin with. Regardless of whether or not you "invite" them, they are already present in your city. You can lobby Congress and make as much noise as you want, but you have no authority to change enforcement of immigration laws. So the question is, what do you do about that?

 

Do you want the people who are already in your city to feel safe to work with law enforcement to report crimes? Or do you want them to be too scared that they might get deported, allowing criminals to go free (or worse: leverage someone's immigration status to abuse or otherwise harm them, knowing they won't go to the police)?

 

We need to fix our immigration system, but a mayor has little to no influence over that. Also, things that could help are generally not popular (increasing caps and quotas, better funding for immigration courts, a more accessible legal immigration policy, etc.) and the things that are popular generally don't help (a big dumb wall in the middle of a desert when most undocumented people come into the US legally or snuck in through ports of entry).

 

There's no incentive to fix this because our politics are broken and our politicians would prefer to have a broken system to rail against in ads and speeches then actually do anything to help.

[B-Man]

 

 

Schmitt Happens: Missouri AG Wins GOP Primary for US Senate

 

 

https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2022/08/02/schmitt-happens-missouri-ag-wins-gop-primary-for-us-senate-n606023

 

 

[Buffarukus]

59 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

If you are a mayor of a large city, there are likely already many undocumented people in the city to begin with. Regardless of whether or not you "invite" them, they are already present in your city. You can lobby Congress and make as much noise as you want, but you have no authority to change enforcement of immigration laws. So the question is, what do you do about that?

 

Do you want the people who are already in your city to feel safe to work with law enforcement to report crimes? Or do you want them to be too scared that they might get deported, allowing criminals to go free (or worse: leverage someone's immigration status to abuse or otherwise harm them, knowing they won't go to the police)?

 

We need to fix our immigration system, but a mayor has little to no influence over that. Also, things that could help are generally not popular (increasing caps and quotas, better funding for immigration courts, a more accessible legal immigration policy, etc.) and the things that are popular generally don't help (a big dumb wall in the middle of a desert when most undocumented people come into the US legally or snuck in through ports of entry).

 

There's no incentive to fix this because our politics are broken and our politicians would prefer to have a broken system to rail against in ads and speeches then actually do anything to help.

 

ill accept this but all your saying is that mayors that oppose the illegal entry into the country and will not provide cover for this act....should. they should make illegal aliens as comfortable as sanctuary states to speak to police without reprocussions. nothing can be done about this issue federally because its not popular. 

 

this doesn't change my original point. you have 2 choices. follow the law or change it. because you say we can't change it and we are in a broken system you want a third choice. ignore it and condemn those who choose not to. (not you directly but many liberals..racist! is the usual response) do it because it creates problem (about police) but ignore the problems created BY IGNORING it. housing, shelter, funds, the response from aliens that continue to enter thinking they can find this guarenteed sanctuary, cartels taking advantage of this, immigrants left in a truck on the side of the road to die on this quest, trafficking...the list goes on. those are direct responses to american leaders saying if you come i will provide cover regardless if the intention is for current or incoming. you see that right? so there is a flip of this coin that liberals completely ignore. so lets change it to a different question. how do you offer sanctuary and avoid that being a signal to make a dangerous journey and avoid all the horrable reprocussions the southern boarder are facing by people in search of it? i dont think you can so maybe stop declaring this and work on daca? im genuinely unsure but tired of this liberal ideology that runs purely off empathy with no regards to disastrous effects downstream. its all over the place in their ideology.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Buffarukus

[B-Man]

 

 

Trump-Endorsed Tudor Dixon Wins Michigan GOP Gubernatorial Primary

 

 

https://redstate.com/carcand/2022/08/02/breaking-trump-endorsed-tudor-dixon-wins-michigan-gop-gubernatorial-primary-n606145

 

 

.

[ChiGoose]

25 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

this doesn't change my original point. you have 2 choices. follow the law or change it.

 

Sanctuary cities are not breaking the law. 

 

Local police are not responsible for immigration enforcement. However, if they suspect that someone in their custody may be here illegally, they often contact immigration enforcement and keep the individual detained until the feds arrive.

 

Generally, sanctuary cities simply do not do that. Law enforcement processes people based on what they are charged with and leaves immigration enforcement to those charged with responsibility for it.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

..

[ChiGoose]

Karrin Taylor Robson was up when the polls closed but then, overnight, the lead changed to Kari Lake. I am told this means it's all fraudulent and it must be the fault of the Deep State Democrat Reverse Vampire Cannibal Pedophiles.

 

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/08/02/arizona-primary-election-2022-live-news-updates-results/10156317002/

[Buffarukus]

4 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Sanctuary cities are not breaking the law. 

 

Local police are not responsible for immigration enforcement. However, if they suspect that someone in their custody may be here illegally, they often contact immigration enforcement and keep the individual detained until the feds arrive.

 

Generally, sanctuary cities simply do not do that. Law enforcement processes people based on what they are charged with and leaves immigration enforcement to those charged with responsibility for it.

 

but coming to this country illegally is a crime. you are saying red states should ignore it. im not generally disagreeing with you if illegals are living peaceful productive lives. but im not going to ignore the basis of what a sanctuary state is saying. come illegally and you will no longer have to worry about this crime. that is signaling to people around the world..cross illegally and come to us and we will protect you. that's not good in any sense for the multitude of reasons i laid out.  people are dying, kids are being trafficked ect ect ect and you are essentially saying endorse it regardless of laws.

 

i drill down to specifics with you as i did with our other conversation...the covid whoopsies! remember? and i think you don't have a good response so you kind of generalize and ignore them. in the whoopsie case your response was, things are hard to get done in the government. ignoring all the work i put into showing clear evidence people who spent their entire lives in virology were either lying or unbelievably wrong in the field they spent their education and lives.

 

in this case we are going in circles on what a sanctuary is actually promoting and its effects. at the end of the day empathy feels great. id love to take that side but know full well that their are major repercussions and victims being produced from this so ill stand up to highlight regardless of what others think, right wing nazi yada yada. the truth is empathy is just as dangerous as hatred if just blindly followed, even more so because its camouflaged. we see alot of negative effects that many ignore with this as everyone wishes to be on the right side of things, thats not necessarily the one you can advertise. 

 

sorry I'm ranting on here again. i think we should agree to disagree as maybe you just don't see my point. 

[ChiGoose]

1 minute ago, Buffarukus said:

 

but coming to this country illegally is a crime. you are saying red states should ignore it. im not generally disagreeing with you if illegals are living peaceful productive lives. but im not going to ignore the basis of what a sanctuary state is saying. come illegally and you will no longer have to worry about this crime. that is signaling to people around the world..cross illegally and come to us and we will protect you. that's not good in any sense for the multitude of reasons i laid out.  people are dying, kids are being trafficked ect ect ect and you are essentially saying endorse it regardless of laws.

 

i drill down to specifics with you as i did with our other conversation...the covid whoopsies! remember? and i think you don't have a good response so you kind of generalize and ignore them. in the whoopsie case your response was, things are hard to get done in the government. ignoring all the work i put into showing clear evidence people who spent their entire lives in virology were either lying or unbelievably wrong in the field they spent their education and lives.

 

in this case we are going in circles on what a sanctuary is actually promoting and its effects. at the end of the day empathy feels great. id love to take that side but know full well that their are major repercussions and victims being produced from this so ill stand up to highlight regardless of what others think, right wing nazi yada yada. the truth is empathy is just as dangerous as hatred if just blindly followed, even more so because its camouflaged. we see alot of negative effects that many ignore with this as everyone wishes to be on the right side of things, thats not necessarily the one you can advertise. 

 

sorry I'm ranting on here again. i think we should agree to disagree as maybe you just don't see my point. 

 

I think your point is valid, I just don't agree with it. And I think that's fine to have a difference of opinion.

 

Sanctuary cities do not prevent immigration enforcement, they just don't take on that federal responsibility locally. It's fine to say that the local law enforcement should help federal agents enforce immigration, I just personally think that has more negative consequences than positive ones.

 

Additionally, studies have shown that sanctuary cities either have the same crime rates as non-sanctuary cities or even lower rates. So from a crime perspective, sanctuary cities can make sense (as I have pointed out with encouraging assistance with local law enforcement). Since all resources, including law enforcement, are limited, focusing on the people who are here illegally and are also committing other crimes seems preferable to me than utilizing limited resources to round up anybody who is undocumented, regardless of whether or not they had committed other crimes.

 

Ultimately, it's up to the federal government to enforce immigration laws. But our system is hopelessly broken. So while we can advocate for changes we believe will improve the system, we have to be realistic about the reality we face now and the choices we have.

[Buffarukus]

2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

 

I think your point is valid, I just don't agree with it. And I think that's fine to have a difference of opinion.

 

Sanctuary cities do not prevent immigration enforcement, they just don't take on that federal responsibility locally. It's fine to say that the local law enforcement should help federal agents enforce immigration, I just personally think that has more negative consequences than positive ones.

 

Additionally, studies have shown that sanctuary cities either have the same crime rates as non-sanctuary cities or even lower rates. So from a crime perspective, sanctuary cities can make sense (as I have pointed out with encouraging assistance with local law enforcement). Since all resources, including law enforcement, are limited, focusing on the people who are here illegally and are also committing other crimes seems preferable to me than utilizing limited resources to round up anybody who is undocumented, regardless of whether or not they had committed other crimes.

 

Ultimately, it's up to the federal government to enforce immigration laws. But our system is hopelessly broken. So while we can advocate for changes we believe will improve the system, we have to be realistic about the reality we face now and the choices we have.

 

either way at least our conversations don't implode into name calling and meme wars. maybe thats not a good thing because i think i can get into that walnut and crack it at some point and this is all false hope. 😅

 

regardless, my original question of how you declare yourself a sanctuary and at the same time not have that become a open invitation to people around the world to not see that as a reason to attempt a very dangerous treck to take is a important one. if it can't be answered it means there will ALWAYS be a crisis. there will ALWAYS be criminals ready to exploit it and it means there will be a HUGE strain on feds to uphold the boarder..just because you are publically announcing it. you advocate that local should not help and that the entire country should become a sancuary for just one of the negative effects they face..collaborating with police safely. which is just one of many that must be overlooked. but i ask you look beyond that to the other reprocussions that can be avoided by simply stating..if you come, do so legally because we will not harbor you. your saftey is more important then my public virtue signal. but this is about elections and peoples snap emotions so its impossible. even if they did not prosecute or whatever sanctuary "really" means. do it privately! that would at least make a difference imo. but when a open invitation is out there from several states what else could someone possibly expect but for people to risk everything and trust a pos that says he will take you and 50 others across to this utopia in a trailer..as one of MANY grim examples. trust to give a "guide" your children and prey they get there. it promotes the good in our society but at the same time encourages people to become completely vulnerable to pure evil. it provides cover for those who wish to smuggle the leading cause of death in this country of our young. that only gets worse the more its advocated and announced. unintentional is no longer a excuse.

 

ill fight along side you to change immigration law and allow good hardworking people a chance at freedom. covering my eyes to the downstream effects of people advocating they break it as if they are not directly related..no.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Buffarukus