The Left Got the Timing Completely Wrong

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: JBurns

Maybe you missed my original post: www.abovetopsecret.com...

The article I linked was about Trump saying "he wants to boost US legal immigration". That is why I compared it to Reagan's amnesty. It is just one example of Trump not being as tough as some of his base might want him to be.

Also, "us vs them" didn't mean you and whoever you think "they" are but the "political elite" fighting each other on the boob tube while getting along just fine once the cameras are turned off.

Interestingly 1point92AU said it themselves, politics is all but a game.

You literally make no sense with your argument. You're either trolling or you don't understand micro and macro economics. Which is it?

You made a direct comparison of illegal immigration to Trump's continued desire for legal immigration and your incorrect assumption this is somehow going to turn off Trump's support base. How did you arrive at that conclusion? Because it's a change in policy? So what? You need to be adaptable to change in a 4 year term. Trump's massive GDP increases as a direct result of his policies have mandated a change in legal immigration policies.

It's the equivalent of a company hitting a growth pattern and to expand/manage the growth they need new hires. When their business is booming they hire more people. When the business is stagnant they freeze hiring. A country runs in a similar manner as a large corporation. Common sense and not complicated to comprehend.

Unless of course you are simply trolling.

a reply to: JBurns

I understand that many of the people who consider themselves conservative or rightwingers don't have a problem with legal immigration.

My point wasn't even about immigration, per se, but about Trump being moderate in some areas and I was just floating the idea that the antagonism shown to the public might be fake.

I think it went over their head, although, the way I worded things probably didn't help.

a reply to: 1point92AU

First of all, I didn't mention illegal immigration in my first post and I am not talking about economics in the one you just replied to.

Can you quote where I "made a direct comparison of illegal immigration to Trump's continued desire for legal immigration"?

In neither of those two posts am I even criticizing Trump. All I'm saying is that he is a centrist that can lean one way to appease one group and also lean the other.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: JBurns

I understand that many of the people who consider themselves conservative or rightwingers don't have a problem with legal immigration.

My point wasn't even about immigration, per se, but about Trump being moderate in some areas and I was just floating the idea that even the antagonism shown to the public might be fake.

I think it went over their head, although, the way I worded things probably didn't help.

Your original post to me was 100% about immigration as you compared legal immigration (Trump's new policy change) to the democrats' illegal immigration inferring this with your statement as them owning "both playbooks". The playbooks in question relative to the topic YOU CREATED (i.e. legal immigration vs illegal immigration) are in direct contradiction to one and other.

You then tried to back track your way out of your mistake by doing the "what I meant was Trump's base won't think he's tough enough". Still talking about immigration.

All you do is deflect, forum slide and then back track.

Evil Congressman Alert!

Elijah Cummings (aka Azzhole on Steroids) is now subpoenaing one of Donald Trump's accountants for 10 years of financial records!

Story: www.politico.com...

And get this. Cummings is getting these records, because CONVICTED LIAR Michael Cohen suggested it!

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: 1point92AU

In neither of those two posts am I even criticizing Trump. All I'm saying is that he is a centrist that can lean one way to appease one group and also lean the other.

LOL, are you serious? How old are you? Do you actually think people believe politicians don't talk out of both sides of their mouth?

Do you see yourself as some illuminating messiah spreading wisdom upon the masses?

I'm seriously laughing my ass off at this.

a reply to: 1point92AU

"To you", enough said.

I actually compared Trump's new policy change to Reagan, not the dems. That is why I don't need to backtrack. You took it where you wanted to.

My statement about "both playbooks" was about both parties being two sides of the same coin and that the rant in your OP about one side going after the other could just be optics. A dog and pony show.

a reply to: carewemust

It's the "Cohen and E-lie-jah" show !! 😎

a reply to: 1point92AU

Who said I was illuminating anyone? You sure do like to put words in people's mouths.

All I'm doing is clearing up some of your wrong assumptions.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: 1point92AU

"To you", enough said.

I actually compared Trump's new policy change to Reagan, not the dems. That is why I don't need to backtrack. You took it where you wanted to.

My statement about "both playbooks" was about both parties being two sides of the same coin and that the rant in your OP about one side going after the other could just be optics. A dog and pony show.

Back track...back track...back track.

If it's not "what you meant" then you should spend some time brushing up on your inference sentence structure.

Back to the OP...you lefties didn't think this one out. The whole debacle is a show of that I am sure. However, in their (the left's) over zealous and unhinged desire to unseat Trump they pulled the trigger 2 years too soon. They should have waited.

If you think it's about optics then please point to another source on the web (other than me) who has made this same observation. Because if it "could just be optics" then the only way that would be true is if this very topic is being discussed elsewhere. So it's not about optics. It's simply the unhinged left made a mistake and pulled the trigger 2 years too soon.

a reply to: 1point92AU

You did it again. Another "to me was 100% about" moment.

The comment about optics was about "INSTEAD...the Deep State has set it up for the democrats to spend the next 2 years defending their corrupt peers." not about the theory that the witchhunt against Trump being sprung too soon.

You sure do assume, a lot. Maybe you should ask for clarification before running with things in the wrong direction?