Re: Government Issued IDs.
I understand why Federal ID’s are not accepted. They may or may not declare residency in a specific state, county city. A state ID or DL provides this.
@EyeDentist, regardless of GOP stated or otherwise intentions, isn’t it a logical requirement that voters are required to prove citizenship?
If there is a high(er) percentage of a minority that doesn’t possess a state issued ID or DL, the question should be: “How do we provided these to all citizens?” Not, protecting/removing a segment of the voting population, which stands on our side of the political line.
A state issued ID and/or DL provide numerous benefits other than voting and should be possessed by all individuals who are legal citizens.
There is a difference between playing hardball in a business negotiation that you can walk away from and playing hardball with the U.S. economy. Obviously, the strength of the US economy is vastly superior to that of Mexico’s and it would be advisable to Mexico’s officials to acquiesce to at least something that Trump wants simply to avoid an all our trade war.
However, Mexico is already a shit hole. The U.S. has significantly further to fall economically. The US working and middle class would be hurt more so than Mexico’s population by strained trade relations between the two countries.
Plus, if we were to shut down trade between the two countries Mexico can at least try to find a new outlet for their exports. I’m willing to bet China would love more Mexican exports. Could they mitigate all of their losses, no, not even close, but they could at least stop the bleeding. The U.S. can’t just get their imports, at the same cost, as before. Other countries would have to ramp up production to meet our demands. Some probably would, but others will flat our think the uncertainty is too great.
Do we? Does the average Trump supporter that holds a sign up that reads “Bring US Manufacturing Back” understand this? I’m not convinced that they do.
IMO, if you bring enough US based manufacturing jobs back to offset unemployment that is due to offshoring you’ll very likely be driving prices up to the point where either a) everyone is worse off or b) other areas of the economy downsize offsetting employment gains. Certainly, I could be wrong, but I’ve highlighted the reasons already as to why I believe this. I don’t see that as slowing the bleeding as much as I see a new wound being opened the second the old one is plugged.
What in NAFTA isn’t reasonable or needs to be revised? That’s my biggest problem with this whole thing. NAFTA has existed since, I believe, 1994 and it benefits the US. Has Trump said what he thinks needs to be re-negotiated?
I disagree. The market is awash with fossil fuels as it is. I think we should be investing in the future of energy in order to become energy independent. We can always ramp up production if we need to in the future.
If it’s as a means to weaken Saudi Arabia, fine.
The US has greater landmass:
According to Investopedia we have more natural resources than China:
Sure, they have a lot more people, but they have a lot less than we do monetarily. The average household income in China is about $10K USD. It’s about $85K in the US.
GDP is relatively close. They have nothing on our military.
Sure they have. There’s no denying that I wasn’t trying to.
Gotcha.
I’m arguing against it because I don’t see what we will gain from re-negotiating NAFTA. I am certainly against simply ripping it up (what about our trade with Canada?).
If Trump; however, wants to spend his Presidency doing it then that’s fine. I think it’s a waste of his time, but that’s his choice. IMO, he’s wasting his momentum and Republican control of Congress, though.
We’re gonna declare war on Mexico?
I actually just thought it was a funny coicidence after reading through the thread…
Of course nothing hurt my feelings, that’s stupid, but have an adolescent point of view - as you do - then call a spade a spade, which I did. It’s not complicated.
Running the federal government is the hardest job on the planet - tougher than any private sector job.
That’s what came up when I searched - once in a CNN article and the other in a Law blog.
No one really seems to deny that he can do it though, they just say it’s a bad idea.
He can’t unilaterally declare war.
Thanks. Largely reasonable. I’ll read your response more carefully this evening or in the morning and come back to you. Difficult for me to do a line-by-line on my phone. Much of what you say here though I either tend to agree with you on, or at least see your point.
The one thing I will say now is that when it comes to the average Trump supporter I would argue he/she just wants a job. Pipeline work pays well and oil industry jobs are sticky. Obama didn’t do anyone any favors there or with gutting the coal industry. We won’t save the world from global warming by shooting ourselves in the head while the rest of the world watches and applauds us for our leadership. Put more tactfully, voluntary mandates that only we obey won’t do much.
I would imagine this happens anywhere people who own nothing are allowed to make decisions for those who own something. Hey…common ownership that’s unrelated to contribution sounds like…nah, forget it. Freedom. Yes, that’s the ticket. It almost sounds like freedom, I guess.
He can do anything, he is the Supreme leader.
^This is his ticket. How you justify our trade relationship with Mexico as a national emergency defies common sense, but as we’ve seen that’s pretty much irrelevent.
SMH and Loppar want to see him try to fly!
Is there anything he can’t do?!
While reasonable in theory, at this juncture that is not the question facing us. Rather, the question is: Why do we need to change a system that is by all (nonpartisan) accounts working just fine, especially when those changes 1) will be expensive, and 2) may disenfranchise a significant number of voters?
There are beaucoup rules in place. There are beaucoup watchdogs monitoring the process. There have been beaucoup investigations looking for it. Widespread voter fraud–it’s not a thing.
You lose.
That got weird. Response posted in the wrong thread.
If you read the article, it discusses Trump’s nationwide performance among Latinos, and demonstrates that it trailed Romney’s.
That’s Oh-for-Four, just in case you’re keeping score.
Land?
Your ire is misdirected. It’s the GOP that has engendered this ‘victim/endangered species’ mindset among those segments of the white electorate–not liberals. It’s the GOP that has isolated this block of voters (and made them paranoid) by telling them their ‘way of life’ is under attack. It’s the GOP that has been encouraging their nativist/populist sentiments for years. And now, all this paranoid nativism/populism has come back to bite them (the GOP) in the ass in the form of a nativist/populist demagogue POTUS.
Please. They’ve been threatening violence for years.
The GOP created this tiger, then set its tail on fire. Don’t blame the Left for that.
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.