The Trump Presidency

Julio3000 said:
Oh, so the fact that the WH had to clarify that they didn't support a clean bill and that they originally dropped his line suggesting to Feinstein that he did from the transcript. Come on. You're just clearly and obviously mistaken here. Even the Washington Examiner for chrissake wrote it up this way.

Feinstein even said it directly. Clean DACA bill now, followed by comprehensive reform.

So in an unscripted exchange, he gives a muddled answer which confuses his caucus and requires walking back, but we're supposed to be impressed because he didn't drool on the table.

Low bar.
Click to expand...

The overreach here is a bit painful. Let's keep it on one channel.

Could a "clean bill" incorporate both DACA and border security or not?
 
"What about a clean DACA bill now, with a commitment that we go into a comprehensive immigration reform procedure?"

That doesn't seem particularly ambiguous.

If his answer were so clear, why does it require such clarification from Republicans?
 
Ann Coulter
@AnnCoulter
IF TRUMP WAS REAGAN: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
Or leave it up. Your call, I'm good either way."
 
Julio3000 said:
"What about a clean DACA bill now, with a commitment that we go into a comprehensive immigration reform procedure?"

That doesn't seem particularly ambiguous.
Click to expand...

I don't know, it seems ambiguous to me when we read the (later) portion of the transcript detailing the 'go into' portion being one hour later.

If his answer were so clear, why does it require such clarification from Republicans?
Click to expand...

They want to firmly stake some sort of claim in a piece of legislation that otherwise has Democrat written all over it?
 
Hawk said:
Ann Coulter
@AnnCoulter
IF TRUMP WAS REAGAN: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
Or leave it up. Your call, I'm good either way."
Click to expand...

Not a happy Trump supporter right now. Going back on a core promise is basically unforgivable. Happy with the economy and foreign policy but immigration was a pillar of his campaign.
 
Hawk said:
I don't know, it's seems ambiguous to me when we read the (later) portion of the transcript detailing the 'go into' portion being one hour later.

They want to firmly stake some sort of claim in a piece of legislation that otherwise has Democrat written all over it?
Click to expand...

So why wasn't their nominal leader clearly staking out that territory with his simple blunticity or whatever?
 
thethe said:
Not a happy Trump supporter right now. Going back on a core promise is basically unforgivable. Happy with the economy and foreign policy but immigration was a pillar of his campaign.
Click to expand...

Ehh, I have always seen DACA and immigration reform as two different things. One is about being humane to kids and not punishing them for the crimes of their parents. The other is about making it harder to commit those crimes in the future, and actually enforcing those laws.
 
Julio3000 said:
So why wasn't their nominal leader clearly staking out that territory with his simple blunticity or whatever?
Click to expand...

"I think a clean DACA bill, to me, is a DACA bill, but we take care of the 800,000 people . . . but I think, to me, a clean bill is a bill of DACA, we take care of them, and we also take care of security."

Again, pretty simple to me.

A clean bill takes care of DACA and takes care of security.

You are choosing to run with a definition of 'clean bill' that can only be about DACA, which is about as disingenuous as the body of your critique here.
 
thethe said:
Not a happy Trump supporter right now. Going back on a core promise is basically unforgivable. Happy with the economy and foreign policy but immigration was a pillar of his campaign.
Click to expand...

Not a Trump or Hilldog supporter but one of the things I actually approved of from the Trump camp was his promise to make US drug companies compete with Canada and possibly others. This was I believe the first promise he backed out on. Not fun when they do that, huh?:
 
thethe said:
Not a happy Trump supporter right now. Going back on a core promise is basically unforgivable. Happy with the economy and foreign policy but immigration was a pillar of his campaign.
Click to expand...

Well, let's see what they do with legislation. I'd like to see the concept tightened up a bit.

If Trump can use DACA as a pawn to push through comprehensive reform (addressing things like the H1B and chain migration, among others) then it might be worth it in the end.
 
Hawk said:
"I think a clean DACA bill, to me, is a DACA bill, but we take care of the 800,000 people . . . but I think, to me, a clean bill is a bill of DACA, we take care of them, and we also take care of security."

Again, pretty simple to me.

A clean bill takes care of DACA and takes care of security.

You are choosing to run with a definition of 'clean bill' that can only be about DACA, which is about as disingenuous as the body of your critique here.
Click to expand...

And yes, I take from that statement that he supports a daca fix plus border security. Tortured as the language is, it's ultimately comprehensible.

My point is that the sum of his statements was ambiguous enough that they required extensive cleaning up after the fact, which wouldn't have been necessary had he clearly answered DF's inquiry. This is neither disingenuous nor controversial...it's backed up by media response to the meeting across the spectrum.

I actually appreciate your pushback against facile criticisms and lazy media narratives about Trump, but when you just blatantly stan for him in support of a similarly facile counternarrative...I dunno. You are diligent and tenacious, but you don't have a lot to work with.
 
Hawk said:
Well, let's see what they do with legislation. I'd like to see the concept tightened up a bit.

If Trump can use DACA as a pawn to push through comprehensive reform (addressing things like the H1B and chain migration, among others) then it might be worth it in the end.
Click to expand...

I think--Democrats being Democrats--that there is a significant chance to do something that can be a win for Trump and a worthwhile effort for the center-right, even if it disappoints the rabid base.
 
THE PRESIDENT: I think what we’re all saying is we’ll do DACA and we can certainly start comprehensive immigration reform the following afternoon. Okay? We’ll take an hour off and then we’ll start.

SENATOR FEINSTEIN: Okay.
 
Hawk said:
Trump's version of a clean DACA bill includes border security provisions.

Pretty simple to me.

And, I'm not sure what definition of "clean bill" you are operating from, but Trump's idea of DACA-Wall legislation shouldn't naturally be precluded.

We're supposed to be impressed by the unscripted exchange, FYI, which has also been made pretty clear.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can refer to a DACA bill as clean if it involves anything else. That seems to be the opposite of the working definition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top