Several Hispanic Trump surrogates reconsider support

"Several Hispanic's"?
So are we talking like 2 or 3?
Only 30,000 plus more to go according to the Hispanics for Trump Twitter page.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: UKTruth
How does one feel 'dissed' when Trump says he is going to uphold the law?
Do you think Trump told them he was going to waive laws?
As I heard it, Trump's tone has softened dramatically and he is emphasising the benefit of legal immigration.

Are you guys actually reading the news or what?

Donald Trump's meeting with his Hispanic advisory council a couple of weeks ago left its members so excited that some even told reporters that Trump was about to significantly soften his approach to illegal immigration and maybe even embrace a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants.

Those advisers got a reality check Wednesday night, when Trump gave arguably his toughest speech on illegal immigration yet — promising a large-scale crackdown and saying that every undocumented immigrant is subject to deportation.

Now some of these Trump advisers, along with leading Hispanic Republicans who had been giving Trump a second look over the last two weeks, are renouncing him — and there are signs many more may follow.

Washing ton Post

Reading, yes. Believing people who have openly stated they are working to stop Trump getting elected? No.
There is nothing from Trump directly that says he was going to support amnesty/a path to citizenship.
You'll need to do more than read the Washington Post to get informed. I tend to start with actually listening to what someone says as opposed to what others say a person has said.

As for WaPo, taking any notice of what their reporters say is like reading the Beano for stock picks.

a reply to: DelMarvel

illegal immigration yet — promising a large-scale crackdown and saying that every undocumented immigrant is subject to deportation.

SO WHAT! The only people who care are those who make money in some way off of illegal immigration. ILLEGAL. This is already a law. WTF is he being knocked for wanting to enforce the law?

a reply to: matafuchs

How did he back down?
WHen?
What Lies?

The Mexican President confronted him about paying for the wall, flat out told him that Mexico won't pay for it. He said Trump didn't respond...that is backing down.

When: Yesterday In Mexico.

What Lies: He said in the press conference after their meeting that they didn't discuss who would pay for the wall...that is a lie, the Mexican President told him to his face Mexico wasn't paying for it.

a reply to: UKTruth

Reading, yes. Believing people who have openly stated they are working to stop Trump getting elected? No.

So Reading, yes.

Burying head in sand, yes.

Got it.

a reply to: kruphix

He confronted him huh? Like, pushed him up on a wall and said 'Ju canot beeld ze wall? '

They did not discuss who would pay for it. The Mexican president said they would not. It happened at the beginning of their private meeting.

They did NOT discuss payment because Trump told him that it was something that would be discussed later. This was a first meeting. No lies.

If my wife tells me I cannot buy a tv and then I tell my friends I will get it and she will pay for it....it is not a lie. It is a response to a statement. Now, if Trump said the president told him they would pay for it and he said that afterwards, then yes, it is a lie.

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: UKTruth

Reading, yes. Believing people who have openly stated they are working to stop Trump getting elected? No.

So Reading, yes.

Burying head in sand, yes.

Got it.

Well, that makes no sense at all.
Try reading more than WaPo and watching CNN. You'd be amazed at how much you can find.
But as I said, most of all, actually listen first hand and rely less on someone else to tell you what to think.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: kruphix

He confronted him huh? Like, pushed him up on a wall and said 'Ju canot beeld ze wall? '

They did not discuss who would pay for it. The Mexican president said they would not. It happened at the beginning of their private meeting.

They did NOT discuss payment because Trump told him that it was something that would be discussed later. This was a first meeting. No lies.

If my wife tells me I cannot buy a tv and then I tell my friends I will get it and she will pay for it....it is not a lie. It is a response to a statement. Now, if Trump said the president told him they would pay for it and he said that afterwards, then yes, it is a lie.

I like the fact that this is the best criticism that can be found on Trump's visit. Over the last two weeks or so, the attacks are so very weak. I am sure Hillary supporters are praying for some real stories to dig their teeth into.

a reply to: kruphix

Honestly, I'm a bit unsure as to how to take his statements. It doesn't appear that he is actually flip-flopping his stance on immigration, but his comments to Ingram are confusing.

"Oh, there’s softening. Look, we do it in a very humane way, and we’re going to see with the people that are in the country. Obviously I want to get the gang members out, the drug peddlers out, I want to get the drug dealers out. We’ve got a lot of people in this country that you can’t have, and those people we’ll get out."

"And then we’re going to make a decision at a later date once everything is stabilized," Trump continued. "I think you’re going to see there’s really quite a bit of softening."

Once what is stabilized? Where will the "softening" be applied? Is the "softening" in his human approach, opposed to an original intent to be inhumane in his approach?

Will he deport only the convicted illegal alien drug dealers, or also those suspected of it? Will he deport gang members, when it's not necessarily a crime to be a member of a gang? What about those her illegally that are not drug dealers or gang members?

Just by reading his own comments, it's very tough to discern what he actually means. He doesn't really say anything of substance.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: kruphix

Honestly, I'm a bit unsure as to how to take his statements. It doesn't appear that he is actually flip-flopping his stance on immigration, but his comments to Ingram are confusing.

"Oh, there’s softening. Look, we do it in a very humane way, and we’re going to see with the people that are in the country. Obviously I want to get the gang members out, the drug peddlers out, I want to get the drug dealers out. We’ve got a lot of people in this country that you can’t have, and those people we’ll get out."

"And then we’re going to make a decision at a later date once everything is stabilized," Trump continued. "I think you’re going to see there’s really quite a bit of softening."

Once what is stabilized? Where will the "softening" be applied? Is the "softening" in his human approach, opposed to an original intent to be inhumane in his approach?

Will he deport only the convicted illegal alien drug dealers, or also those suspected of it? Will he deport gang members, when it's not necessarily a crime to be a member of a gang? What about those her illegally that are not drug dealers or gang members?

Just by reading his own comments, it's very tough to discern what he actually means. He doesn't really say anything of substance.

Sounds like he is going to get criminals out first and not deport 11m people in one go.

a reply to: UKTruth

Sounds like? That does not appear to be what he said.

Also, where does the softening come in to play? Will he deport people alleged to be part of a gang, even though that is not necessarily illegal?

He seems to have opened the door for more questions than answers. He's not being very clear.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
Trump already has the guarantee of the majority make up of the citizens in the US. if ge had the Latino vote, it would be an added bonus, if not he still wins.

I dont think hes going to be pandering to any of ethnicity groups any more. He'll most like focus on the undecided votes now.

This is where people get confused. The softened stance was not geared to getting more Hispanic voters, that ship has sailed. It was geared to college educated whites in the suburbs of battle ground states who normally vote Republican but find Trumps hard line to be unrealistic and offensive. Those numbers have now moved to far into Clinton's camp and to Trump it did not appear the gains would be more than the loss he would take from his core supporters who did not like all that compassion talk.

Trumps big problem is he is doing poorly with the largest group voters 35 and under, with all minority groups, with Women and with Educated white males. He is trying to win the election with one demographic non college educated white males. And that is why is he will lose.

a reply to: matafuchs

They didn't discuss it because Trump backed down from it when confronted about it.

Pretty simple.

a reply to: kruphix

Says who? You? Do you have a video? Audio? All there is are HuffPo hit pieces 'interpreting' the conversation.

a reply to: kruphix

Trump can not discuss or negotiate specific policies with foreign leaders yet.

He has not been elected president yet.

Pretty simple.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: kruphix

Says who? You? Do you have a video? Audio? All there is are HuffPo hit pieces 'interpreting' the conversation.

Oh right...this defense.

Well the Mexican President has stated that the very first thing he said to Trump was that Mexico wasn't going to pay for the wall, and trump had no response. And you know what...Trump's campaign is not disputing that fact.

So yes, Trump backed down in the face of the Mexican President and couldn't go through with his tough talk.

Anymore mental gymnastics to defend The Donald?

He hasn't flip flopped on anything. What exactly has he changed positions on in regard to immigration?

He Is being a bit more diplomatic and presidential which is good, but has not changed his position as I can see.

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: kruphix

Lol which is it? His he softening, or hard-line on immigration. You just posted 2 diametrically different OPs.

That is because there was "2 diametrically different " Trumps this last week.

Don't blame the OP for Trumps Psychopathy...

Or as Alfonso Aguilar, president of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, who had prominently endorsed Trump put it

Trump had signaled a willingness to moderate some of his immigration plans, including limiting his call for deportations to those convicted of crimes.

“At this point, I just don’t see how I can support him. So I’m withdrawing my support,” Aguilar said.

“I was expecting something very different last night.
I’m not naive, I knew who I was dealing with. I knew this could happen. It was a risk.”


“From a political perspective, this is the end of Donald Trump. I really think now he’s definitely going to lose.”

www.pbs.org...

originally posted by: UKTruth

Try reading more than WaPo and watching CNN. You'd be amazed at how much you can find.

Is this a reliable enough source for you? Or will it have to come from Breitbart before you believe it?

FOX News Latino

a reply to: GoShredAK

People should stop wasting time discussing this imaginary thing with the OP.

I asked him multiple times to provide me with things Trump had changed about his immigration policy, and he just keeps throwing me the source from some radio, where Trump said he will soften his policy.

He won't change a thing. Not sure why do some people have hard time understanding it.

And it's ridiculously funny to read posts by our member Silly. Trump's visit to Mexico was a complete disaster""...she just keeps repeating anything she hears from Clinton's News Network, and thinks she's making a point...