2024 Pre-Election Political Polls | POLL - Trump would have had 7 point lead over Biden

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 6K
  • Views: 144K
  • Politics 
theel4life said:
are you afraid there will be violence?
Click to expand...
No, he will be busy making accommodations for all the people he bought on the run-up to the election.

And before someone not in the know gets bent out of shape over my post, know that it's a play on a board joke.
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
Trump is running on deporting illegal immigrants and Harris is not. Many Hispanic voters don’t support illegal immigration.
Click to expand...
You conveniently left out the part where Trump is going to send the United States military into U.S. cities in order to forcefully round up tens of millions of illegals and herd them into internment camps before mass evacuation.

But, you’re right. It sounds much more humane the way you phrase it.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
You conveniently left out the part where Trump is going to send the United States military into U.S. cities in order to forcefully round up tens of millions of illegals and herd them into internment camps before mass evacuation.

But, you’re right. It sounds much more humane the way you phrase it.
Click to expand...
For some, the cruelty is the point. Many others haven't considered the consequences of this policy on the economy and the best use of limited government resources.
 
Zoo_View said:
I have a memory of you “defending” HY2012 when some of us (I definitely was one) would call out his Trumplican BS…..you were saying we needed to understand him and reach out and reason with HY2012.

HY2012 is the same Trumplican he was one year ago, two years ago, four years ago as he is today.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understood my point then. You don't understand my point now. There's a difference between engaging with ideas and just browbeating people, especially with accusations that you don't really know to be true.

It's sad that I have to explain it to you many times over, given that in your words I'm an idiot savant. But here we are.
 
BillOfRights said:
For some, the cruelty is the point. Many others haven't considered the consequences of this policy on the economy and the best use of limited government resources.
Click to expand...
Yeah among the consequences that they haven't considered are that any attempt at a mass round-up of alleged illegals is going to sweep into its reach many US citizens, either because the authorities mess up or due to the fact that many (hundreds of thousands, if not millions) of these "illegals" have children who are American citizens. I wonder, what exactly is Trump's plan for deporting parents of minor US citizens? I'm confident he doesn't know or care, and the likes of Stephen Miller will say that this sort of dilemma is just fine because those kids didn't deserve to be American citizens anyway. (Recall that Trump and his allies have previously proposed ending birthright citizenship.)
 
Here's the good news: whatever he says, and whether he actually believes it or not, there is virtually no chance that Trump will succeed in effecting mass deportations of millions of undocumented immigrants. He may be able to reduce unlawful entries at the border to some extent - whether by going back to putting kids in cages or otherwise - but the idea that the federal authorities are going to be able to round up and deport millions of people in any kind of systematic fashion is laughable. I'm sure they will do it to some people, and it will be cruel and heartbreaking and entirely counterproductive, and Trump will tout it was him fixing the problem. But millions? Nah. Even hundreds of thousands might be pushing it.

In other words: this is all just classic BS Republican campaign rhetoric. Many of them know large-scale deportation is implausible and cost-prohibitive. Just the typical lies they will tell to their voters to score political points, knowing that their voters are so brainwashed that they don't even care whether it's a real policy proposal or not. Just like they're lying to them now about the recent letter from a federal official addressing the number of people who have open immigration cases and have been convicted of crimes. They know many of those people have been here for decades, and that many (probably most) of the "convicted murderers" supposedly roaming the streets are serving US jail sentences, not roaming free. But it doesn't matter. They will lie as much as they need to lie to fearmonger about the problem, which of course they have no intention of "solving," because then they couldn't campaign on it anymore.
 
CFordUNC said:
Agreed, and fuck 'em. If that comes to pass, let them eat cake. Elections have consequences.
Click to expand...
On the surface, it would seem deporting 10 to 20 million people would have 2 major economic impacts. Number one - by eliminating that many people demand goes down and GDP shrinks, even into recession.
On the other side, without enough workers, prices increase, so we could have inflation and shrinking GDP at the same time
Now, one will offset the other to some degree, but this would have huge negative impacts on the economy
 
Last edited:
rodoheel said:
Here's the good news: whatever he says, and whether he actually believes it or not, there is virtually no chance that Trump will succeed in effecting mass deportations of millions of undocumented immigrants. He may be able to reduce unlawful entries at the border to some extent - whether by going back to putting kids in cages or otherwise - but the idea that the federal authorities are going to be able to round up and deport millions of people in any kind of systematic fashion is laughable. I'm sure they will do it to some people, and it will be cruel and heartbreaking and entirely counterproductive, and Trump will tout it was him fixing the problem. But millions? Nah. Even hundreds of thousands might be pushing it.

In other words: this is all just classic BS Republican campaign rhetoric. Many of them know large-scale deportation is implausible and cost-prohibitive. Just the typical lies they will tell to their voters to score political points, knowing that their voters are so brainwashed that they don't even care whether it's a real policy proposal or not. Just like they're lying to them now about the recent letter from a federal official addressing the number of people who have open immigration cases and have been convicted of crimes. They know many of those people have been here for decades, and that many (probably most) of the "convicted murderers" supposedly roaming the streets are serving US jail sentences, not roaming free. But it doesn't matter. They will lie as much as they need to lie to fearmonger about the problem, which of course they have no intention of "solving," because then they couldn't campaign on it anymore.
Click to expand...
Back in 1942, while we were fighting wars on two fronts, they managed to round up 120K people and put them in detention camps. Removing a million would be child's play with military involvement and indiscriminate detention policies greenlighted by the Supreme Court. Here are some issues to ponder:

1. There are no good remedies for citizens who are unlawfully detained. Kash Patel can wink wink tell his stormtroopers to round up anyone who looks Hispanic and take them to a sorting facility. Anyone who can prove their are a citizen can be released upon proof. So the citizens can be rounded up and then released. But what are the remedies? There are none, not any more.

It used to be that if federal agents violated your constitutional rights, you could sue them in what is known as a Bivins action. The Supreme Court has been narrowing Bivins to the point where it is barely a thing at all, and at the first opportunity presented, they will overrule it. So the detailed Latinos can't sue the officers. If they sue the department, the department will say, "it's just bad apple agents." They might win in court eventually. but it will take a long time and by then the detention/internment/concentration camps will be full. And at most, the government will have to pay damages, which Trump doesn't care about in the slightest.

2. It also used to be that a judge could issue a nationwide order to stop this type of shit. But the right-wingers have been abusing nationwide injunctions to the point where the Supreme Court is basically staying all of them. So there could be some judges in California who would put a stop to this, but their injunctions would only be valid in their districts. There is no way an injunction against this thing would be upheld in the Fifth Circuit, which is Texas, LA and Mississippi. You can round up a lot of people in those areas. I also think the newly radicalized 8th would not consider an injunction, and that's AR, MO, IA and I don't remember where MN or KS/NE are.

3. Trump will declare a national emergency and use the military, for logistical support if nothing else. The Supreme Court let him declare a national emergency to build the wall with funds allocated to the Defense Department. Nothing has changed on the national emergency front. I see no reason why the Supreme Court would change its tune now. And if there are any problems, the Republican Congress will pass a law to allow the military to be involved in deportation actions. There is no constitutional prohibition on the use of the military. It's just a statute.

4. If the courts try to stop it, Kash Patel will largely ignore them. He'll make token gestures at ending the "worst abuses" of the program while maintaining the programs. Will the threat of contempt stop his department? No, it will not. First, Trump can pardon everyone involved. Second, the right-wingers have already shown a willingness to lie and deceive courts. John Gore lied his ass off in the case challenging Trump's census bureau hijinks. He did so knowing that he could be subject to any number of sanctions. He was caught. Nothing happened to him, and again, Trump can pardon.

Well, surely if an attorney were to disgrace himself that way, there would be consequences, right? John Gore is now a partner at Jones Day. He was, to my knowledge, not a partner before he started working for Trump. He was actually rewarded by the right-wing legal machine for doing what he did.

5. If Trump is serious about rounding up millions of people, he could do it and it wouldn't be all that challenging. And while I actually doubt that Trump cares enough to follow through, his underlings absolutely do care and will take it on themselves. Kash Patel and Stephen Miller, for sure. The AG will be a MAGA loyalist and he too will probably be a true believer.

I'm not saying it's guaranteed to happen, but your optimism that it can't is misplaced, imo.
 
superrific said:
Back in 1942, while we were fighting wars on two fronts, they managed to round up 120K people and put them in detention camps. Removing a million would be child's play with military involvement and indiscriminate detention policies greenlighted by the Supreme Court. Here are some issues to ponder:

1. There are no good remedies for citizens who are unlawfully detained. Kash Patel can wink wink tell his stormtroopers to round up anyone who looks Hispanic and take them to a sorting facility. Anyone who can prove their are a citizen can be released upon proof. So the citizens can be rounded up and then released. But what are the remedies? There are none, not any more.

It used to be that if federal agents violated your constitutional rights, you could sue them in what is known as a Bivins action. The Supreme Court has been narrowing Bivins to the point where it is barely a thing at all, and at the first opportunity presented, they will overrule it. So the detailed Latinos can't sue the officers. If they sue the department, the department will say, "it's just bad apple agents." They might win in court eventually. but it will take a long time and by then the detention/internment/concentration camps will be full. And at most, the government will have to pay damages, which Trump doesn't care about in the slightest.

2. It also used to be that a judge could issue a nationwide order to stop this type of shit. But the right-wingers have been abusing nationwide injunctions to the point where the Supreme Court is basically staying all of them. So there could be some judges in California who would put a stop to this, but their injunctions would only be valid in their districts. There is no way an injunction against this thing would be upheld in the Fifth Circuit, which is Texas, LA and Mississippi. You can round up a lot of people in those areas. I also think the newly radicalized 8th would not consider an injunction, and that's AR, MO, IA and I don't remember where MN or KS/NE are.

3. Trump will declare a national emergency and use the military, for logistical support if nothing else. The Supreme Court let him declare a national emergency to build the wall with funds allocated to the Defense Department. Nothing has changed on the national emergency front. I see no reason why the Supreme Court would change its tune now. And if there are any problems, the Republican Congress will pass a law to allow the military to be involved in deportation actions. There is no constitutional prohibition on the use of the military. It's just a statute.

4. If the courts try to stop it, Kash Patel will largely ignore them. He'll make token gestures at ending the "worst abuses" of the program while maintaining the programs. Will the threat of contempt stop his department? No, it will not. First, Trump can pardon everyone involved. Second, the right-wingers have already shown a willingness to lie and deceive courts. John Gore lied his ass off in the case challenging Trump's census bureau hijinks. He did so knowing that he could be subject to any number of sanctions. He was caught. Nothing happened to him, and again, Trump can pardon.

Well, surely if an attorney were to disgrace himself that way, there would be consequences, right? John Gore is now a partner at Jones Day. He was, to my knowledge, not a partner before he started working for Trump. He was actually rewarded by the right-wing legal machine for doing what he did.

5. If Trump is serious about rounding up millions of people, he could do it and it wouldn't be all that challenging. And while I actually doubt that Trump cares enough to follow through, his underlings absolutely do care and will take it on themselves. Kash Patel and Stephen Miller, for sure. The AG will be a MAGA loyalist and he too will probably be a true believer.

I'm not saying it's guaranteed to happen, but your optimism that it can't is misplaced, imo.
Click to expand...
I have a response here, but Geister is right that this isn't the thread for it. Let me just briefly say that I'm not discounting the idea that a second Trump admin can and will try some fascist crap - and I think we'll see less of the bumbling Three Stooges routine we got from the first couple years, especially, of his first admin - but for a variety of reasons I think we're highly unlikely to see right-wing repression of the scale you've suggested within the next 4 years.
 
rodoheel said:
I have a response here, but Geister is right that this isn't the thread for it. Let me just briefly say that I'm not discounting the idea that a second Trump admin can and will try some fascist crap - and I think we'll see less of the bumbling Three Stooges routine we got from the first couple years, especially, of his first admin - but for a variety of reasons I think we're highly unlikely to see right-wing repression of the scale you've suggested within the next 4 years.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you. I also sincerely hope we never need to find out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top